
Glass / 



REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON 
MARKING HISTORICAL SITES 
IN RHODE ISLAND 



1913 




The French Camp Ground, Providence 



&tate of lUjnto 3fllaub ano {frmritonr? Plantations 

\ 

Report of Committee 






MARKING HISTORICAL 
SITES IN RHODE ISLAND 



MADE TO THE 



GENERAL ASSEMBLY 



JANUARY SESSION, 1913 



PROVIDENCE, R. I.: 

E. L. FREEMAN COMPANY, PRINTERS 
I914 



1?4f\ 



MOV 2? I9W 






To the Honorable, the General Assembly of the State of 
Rhode Island and Providence Plantations: 

The Executive Committee of the Rhode Island Historical 
Society to which, in connection with the Secretary of 
State, was committed the task of marking Historical Sites 
in the State of Rhode Island respectfully begs leave to 
submit the following report. 

The Executive Committee appointed the following 
gentlemen a subcommittee, "the Committee on Marking 
Historical Sites," to superintend the placing of memorials: 
Wilfred H. Munro, Chairman; Clarence S. Brigham, Amasa 
M. Eaton, David W. Hoyt, Norman M. Isham, William 
MacDonald, Walter E. Ranger, William B. Weeden, 
George F. Weston, Charles P. Bennett, Secretary of State. 

This Committee has erected memorials as follows: 
A tablet was erected at Nockum Hill, Barrington, on 
June 23, 1906, in accordance with the earnest request of 
another historical association. The tablet bears this 
inscription: 

THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH 

IN MASSACHUSETTS 

WAS FOUNDED NEAR THIS SPOT 

A. D. 1663 

REV. JOHN MYLES 

BENJAMIN ALBY JOHN BUTTERWORTH 

JOSEPH CARPENTER ELDAD KINGSLEY 

JAMES BROWN NICHOLAS TANNER 

FOUNDERS 



On July 18, 1906, a tablet bearing this inscription was 
placed on the Governor Bull House in Newport: 

"the governor bull house" 

the oldest house in rhode island 

built, in part, in 1 639 by 

henry bull 

governor, under the royal charter, of the colony of 

rhode island and providence 

plantations 
in the years 1 685-86 and 169o 

On August 8, 1906, the Gilbert Stuart House, North 
Kingstown was marked by a tablet with the following 
inscription : 

GILBERT STUART 
BORN HERE 1 775 DIED IN BOSTON 1 828 



A GREAT AMERICAN ARTIST 

TAUGHT BY WEST AND REYNOLDS 

HE YEARNED TO PORTRAY OUR 

GREATEST CITIZEN 



HIS PORTRAITS EMBODY 

THE WISDOM AND DIGNITY OF 

WASHINGTON 



On October 2, 1906, two tablets were erected to mark the 
site of the Roger Williams House and Spring, on North 
Main street, Providence. The inscriptions were as follows : 

A FEW RODS EAST OF 

THIS SPOT STOOD THE 

HOUSE 

OF 

ROGER WILLIAMS 

FOUNDER OF PROVIDENCE 

1636 

UNDER THIS HOUSE 

STILL FLOWS 

THE 

ROGER WILLIAMS 

SPRING 

To commemorate the fortifications thrown up at Field's 
Point, two tablets were erected on May 16, 1907, bearing 
inscriptions as follows : 

FORT 

INDEPENDENCE 

ERECTED 

ON ROBIN HILL, 1 775 

STRENGTHENED, 1814 

THESE EARTHWORKS 
WERE THROWN UP 

IN 1775 
AND STRENGTHENED 

IN 1814 



On May 27, 1907, the Reynold's House, at Bristol, was 
marked with a tablet as follows : 

THIS HOUSE BUILT 

ABOUT THE YEAR 1 698 BY 

JOSEPH REYNOLDS 

WAS OCCUPIED BY 

LAFAYETTE 

AS HIS HEADQUARTERS SEPTEMBER 1 778 

DURING THE WAR OF 

AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE 

On June 15, 1907, on the Babbitt Farm at Wickford, a 
tablet was placed with this inscription : 

HERE 

WERE BURLED 

IN ONE GRAVE 

FORTY MEN 

WHO DEED IN THE SWAMP FIGHT 

OR ON THE RETURN MARCH 

TO 

RICHARD SMITH'S BLOCKHOUSE 

DECEMBER, 1 67 5 

The camp of the French troops, near Rochambeau 
Avenue, in Providence, was, on July 29, 1907, marked by a 
tablet with the following inscription: 



ON THIS GROUND 

BETWEEN HOPE STREET AND 

NORTH MAIN STREET AND 

NORTH OF ROCHAMBEAU AVENUE 

THE FRENCH TROOPS 

COMMANDED BY 

COUNT ROCHAMBEAU 

WERE ENCAMPED 

IN 

1782 

ON THEIR MARCH FROM YORKTOWN 

TO BOSTON WHERE THEY 

EMBARKED FOR FRANCE 

September 21, 1907, a tablet was placed upon a boulder 
in Central Falls to mark the scene of " Pierce's Fight." 
This tablet was stolen. It was replaced by one which 
bears the following inscription : 

pierce' s fight 

near this spot 

captain michael pierce 

and his company of 

plymouth colonists 

ambushed and outnumbered were 

almost annihilated 

by the indians 

MARCH 26 1676 



8 

On October 19, 1907, the Massasoit Spring at Warren 
was marked by a tablet with this inscription: 

THIS TABLET 

PLACED BESIDE THE GUSHING WATER 

KNOWN FOR MANY GENERATIONS AS 

MASSASOIT'S SPRING 

COMMEMORATES THE GREAT 

INDIAN SACHEM MASSASOIT 

"FRIEND OF THE WHITE MAN" 

RULER OF THIS REGION WHEN THE 

PILGRIMS OF THE MAYFLOWER 

LANDED AT PLYMOUTH 

IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD 1620 

May 30, 1908, a tablet bearing the following inscription 
was placed upon Drum Rock, in the village of Apponaug, 
in the town of Warwick : 

DRUM ROCK 

A 

TRYSTING-SIGNAL AND 

MEETING PLACE OF THE 

COWESET INDIANS 

AND THEIR 

KINDRED NARRAGANSETTS 

July 6, 1908, dedicatory exercises were held at Spring 
Green, Warwick, in connection with the erection of a 
tablet to mark "Camp Ames." The tablet bears this 
inscription : 




Camp Ames, Spring Green Farm, Warwick 



THIS FIELD KNOWN AS 
CAMP AMES ON SPRING 
GREEN FARM WAS THE 
CAMP GROUND OF THE 
THIRD RHODE ISLAND 

VOLUNTEERS 

SUBSEQUENTLY THE 

THIRD RHODE ISLAND 

HEAVY ARTILLERY 

PREVIOUS TO THEIR 

DEPARTURE FOR THE SEAT 

OF WAR SEPTEMBER 7 

l8l6 

September 10, 1908, a tablet was placed upon the house 
in Portsmouth in which General Prescott was captured 
by Lieutenant Colonel Barton during the Revolutionary 
War. The inscription is as follows : 

IN THIS HOUSE, 

HIS HEADQUARTERS, 

THE BRITISH GENERAL PRESCOTT 

WAS TAKEN PRISONER 

ON THE NIGHT OF JULY 9, 1 777 

BY LLEUTENANT-COLONEL BARTON 

OF THE RHODE ISLAND LLNE 

October 17, 1908, a tablet was placed in Johnston to 
mark the location of the Indian soapstone quarry. The 
tablet bears this inscription : 



IO 

AN INDIAN QUARRY 

ONE OF THE FEW IN NEW ENGLAND 

FROM THIS SOAPSTONE LEDGE 

NOW ONLY PARTLY UNCOVERED 

THE INDIANS 

FASHIONED UTENSILS 

FOR FAMILY USE AND FOR TRADE 

On May 5, 1909, the Stephen Hopkins House in Provi- 
dence, was marked by a tablet with this inscription : 

STEPHEN HOPKINS 

1707-1785 

MERCHANT AND SHIPBUILDER, 

TEN TIMES GOVERNOR OF RHODE ISLAND, 

CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, 

CHANCELLOR OF BROWN UNIVERSITY, 

MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS, 

SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, 

LIVED IN THIS HOUSE 1742-1785. 

WASHINGTON WAS HERE A GUEST APRIL 6, 1 776. 

THIS BUILDING ERECTED 

AT THE CORNER OF SOUTH MAIN STREET ABOUT 1 742 

WAS REMOVED TO ITS 

PRESENT SITE IN 1804. 

June 24, 1909, a tablet was erected upon the General 
Nathanael Greene House, in Coventry, with this inscrip- 
tion: 



II 

NATHANAEL GREENE 

OF THE 

GENERALS OF THE AMERICAN 

REVOLUTION 

SECOND ONLY TO WASHINGTON 

BUILT THIS HOUSE IN 1770 

AND LIVED IN IT UNTIL AS A PRWATE 

HE JOINED THE ARMY 

AT CAMBRIDGE LN 1 775 

October 27, 1909, the Esek Hopkins House, Providence, 
was marked by a tablet. The inscription is as follows : 

ESEK HOPKINS 

1718-1802 

FIRST COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF 

OF THE 

AMERICAN NAVY 

LIVED IN THIS HOUSE 

Photographs of the memorials were taken and reproduc- 
tions are filed herewith. As far as possible the poems and 
speeches delivered at the dedications of the memorials 
are also filed with this report. 

The cost of the memorials, an itemized statement of 
which has already been published in the reports of the 
State Auditor, is $1,500.87, — eighty seven cents more 
than the sum appropriated. 

For Tablets $1,269 00 

Mason Work 116 22 

Printing 52 00 

Photographs 63 65 

$1,500 87 



12 

The expenses incurred by members of the Committee 
in connection with the placing and dedication of the tablets 
have in no case been charged against the appropriation. 

At the last session of the Legislature an additional appro- 
priation of five hundred dollars ($500) was made for the 
continuation of the Committee's work. Orders were 
placed as quickly as possible after this second appropria- 
tion became available, for the casting of seven tablets 
to be placed in Little Compton, Newport, Pawtucket 
and Providence. 

These tablets were completed so late in the autumn that, 
in view of the uncertain weather, it seemed best to defer 
their placing until the spring. Their cost thus far has 
been $438. The additional expenses that must be 
incurred in connection with their erection will probably 
exhaust the appropriation. A report will hereafter be 
made respecting their placing and dedication. 

Respectfully submitted, 

For the Executive Committee, 

WILFRED H. MUNRO, Chairman. 
February 18, 1913. 




The First Baptist Church, Nockum Hill, Barrington 



THEN AND NOW 

or 

JOHN MYLES 

One of the Immortals 



At the dedication of the Nockum Hill tablet the following poem was read 
by the Reverend Martin S. Williston 



"Twas long surmised, the age of gold, 
Lay in the fabled days of old, 
Those hoary days, that yet wer new, 
When men wer babes and sages few, 
When mind and body both wer bare, 
And man's sole raiment was his hair. 
We're told indeed, that Father Adam 
And that new lady, his first Madam, 
Wer wondrous peopl in their way, 
Unmatcht by any later day — 
For gray tradition long has claimed 
That these two Ancients I hav named, 
Wer first in valu as in time— 
And man's first moment was his prime, 
Since, brooding o'er her cosmic plan, 
Great Nature hatcht the perfect man; 
But if she did, we wel might beg 



14 

She'd lay another human eg 

Of like incomparabl strain 

And hatch us such a man agin. 

Since none like him from then til now 

On life's broad stage has made his bow. 

But man was least in that dim past 

His worst was first, his best is last. 

Great nature in her primal plan 

Commenct with rudimentary man, 

And bilt him slowly age by age 

Unitl he reacht his modern state. 

A creature wiser, abler too, 

Than walkt the erth when time was new. 

The world is better now than then, 

Advanct the race of living men, 

While our "New Woman" is a queen, 

Whose like the Ages had not seen; 

Nor is it pride that moves us thus 

To cite the honor du to us, 

But timely zeal to be exact 

And state the simpl homely fact, 

For who of us would care to be, 

The tenants of a century 

When guileless saints from gibbets swung 

And mumbling crones wer promptly hung 

For gazing slantways thru their eyes 

And playing they wer darkly wise — 

When such as chose to preach and pray 



i5 

In their own set and special way. 

Wer curst and scourged and bruised with blows 

As Heven's most contumacious foes, 

While other for the heinous sin 

Of withering age and wrinkled skin 

Wer shrewdly charged with taking part, 

In black and diabolic art, 

That art a myth, a bogey quite, 

A specter born of childish fright 

At mouthings of neurotic trance, 

Or antics of "Saint Vitus' Dance;" 

But peaceful "Friend" or trembling witch 

(It littl mattered which was which), 

Fell both alike beneath the ban, 

As ruthless foes of God and man, 

Because believd to be "too thick" 

With him the scornful called "Old Nick" 

And godly Baptists went to jail, 

Adjudged to be without the pale 

Of public justis, since they saw 

The reading of a higher law 

Than Sheriff's writ or Priest's command 

Or aught engrossed by human hand, 

And took their orders from the sky, 

In mandates of the Lord Most High. 

Followed the curse and clanking chain, 

Ferocious hate and penal pain, 

Ordained by Church, decreed by State 



i6 

These stalwarts to exterminate, 
For no offens that we can see 
But fervent love of liberty. 

The "good old days! — Perhaps they wer, 

But frankly who would not prefer 

The "Brand new" date, the latest sun, 

The radiant century just begun ! 

Spans our new sky the larger hope, 

Expands our thought with wider scope 

Than wer vouchsaft to days of yore, 

Since time leads on from less to more 

And we who now possess the stage 

Are blest as was no former age, 

Tho surely ' twas no fault to be 

A nativ of antiquity; 

Our forebears merit neither praise not blame 

Because they hither erly came 

And spent their brief allotted time 

Ere yet our race had reacht its prime; 

We giv them thanks that they, not we, 

Arrived before we came to be. 

Where wer we now, had they not been, 

Those massiv, stern, Homeric men, 

Sincere and somber, harsh and tru, 

Gallant and grim and strong to do, 

Who joind to serv the public weal 

Rough hands, stout harts and wil of steel. 

Perchance had we been less than they 



i7 

If sent to tame their strenuous day. 
Then turn we back with friendly eyes 
To those departed centuries, 
When virtu's self was crude and rude, 
And boistrous ruffians oft wer good. 
Their errors we may well condone, 
As we attemt to mend our own. 

Thus paying tribute to the past, 
Yet counting Time's best day its last, 
We come to laurel with our praise 
A name sent down from ancient days — 
A memory, a wraith, a shade — 
Nathless a star no night can fade: 
Our hero was a soldier tru, 
Who fought his fight as brave men do, 
Then bowed submissive to the call 
Of mortal fate, that summons all. 
"Ded!" So the mossy marbles say, 
While centuries dim hav past away 
Since first he slept, returned to dust, 
The voiceless slumbers of the just. 
" Ded, " say you ! He— the friend of God- 
He — lost beneath the soulless sod! 
He livs — wil ever liv, for vain 
The might of deth, its prison chain, 
When valorous souls its challenge meet 
Empowered its malis to defeat — 
For mind is master, tho the fo 



i8 

May lay the helpless body low, 
If but the wil its empire hold, 
With spirit tru and Conscience bold. 
'Twas thus prevaild the dauntless man. 
Undreding fate and deth's dark ban. 

Whens came and why, our preacher knight, 
With courage and with soul alight, 
Tempting the lonely wilderness, 
Rimmd round with savage Heathennesse? 

He came, our valiant Myles, because 

A dastard king and shameless laws 

Struck at God's face — smote manhood down, 

Claimd right "divine" for lord and crown — 

And drove without the altar-rail 

Whoever's soul was not for sale — 

Vowd scurge and sword and prison cell 

And awesome woes of lurid hell 

To all who with unbending knee 

Withstood the church's harsh decree. 

No craven, Myles, to su for grace 

Or barter truth for power or place; 

Manlike he stood and made reply; 

"I serv the king enthroned on High, — 

No mortal may my spirit bind, 

No law constrain the dethless mind. 

King and Lord Bishop count for naught 

In the imperial realms of thought. 



19 

I fear not man — I wil not yield, 

With truth my buckler,— God my shield." 

Thereon, the righteous man made haste 
To cross old Ocean's weltering waste, 
To gain, relieved of forct control, 
The larger freedom of the soul. 
With joy our exile toucht the strand 
Of our new Western Promist Land ; 
The altars on whose virgin sod 
Read/' Welcome all the friends of God. 
With generous thoughts and harts entwined 
Behold a shrine for humankind. " 
Thus dreamd the profet, nobly bent 
On making real his high intent. 
Alas, for dream and vision fair, 
For hopes that vanisht into air! 
Not yet, not yet, the Golden Age 
Nor love writ large on history's page ! 
Too promt the saint to lift the sword, 
Who caught this message from his Lord ; 
" Smite swiftly, smite them hip and thigh, 
These Belial Sons of Blasfemy!" 

Now, blasfemy, in days of yore 
Ment honest thinking, nothing more; 
If man with man could not agree 
About unknown reality, 
Out from its scabbard leapt the blade 



20 

To make the doubtful soul afraid, 
Since not to grant what I held tru, 
Was proof that God detested you, 
And if one kept his stubborn way 
He'd meet his doom at Judgment Day ; 
For only everlasting fire 
Could satisfy the holy ire 
That flamed against the errant mind, 
My way to follow disinclined. 

But Pastor Myles held fast to this, 
That loyal Christians should not miss 
Immersion — drenching and complete, 
Baptized thruout from hed to feet; 
"Nay, nay," proclaimed the ruling sect. 
'Tis not enjoined upon the "Elect" 
To sink in water deep as that 
Before the shrine we worship at; 
A drop or two is wet enough 
Perdition's balefires to rebuff — 
Now, by the Lord we love and serv 
From this high doctrine, we'll not swerv. 
Recant, deny! " 'Tis dedly sin, 
Baptizing so much water in. " 
"But right am I," said Myles in turn, 
"Recant! Deny!! I'd sooner burn. 
Think what you wil — lo, I'm content — 
To think as you I'll ne'er consent. 
My thought, my wil, my hart are free — 



21 

No man shal wrest my soul from me ; 
It fears me not to face your wrath, 
If I but walk the 'Narrow Path.' " 

And thus he went his dauntless way, 
Without concernment or dismay, 
Patient and gentl, staunch and tru, 
Brave herald of a Gospel new. 

Meantime a cycle has unrolled 
And time is ripe with memories old— 
And stil with thankfulness do we 
Extol this Son of Liberty. 

MARTIN S. WILLISTON. 



THE GOVERNOR BULL HOUSE 



Address of William Paine Sheffield, Jr., June 18, 1906 



This tablet is placed on this house, now the oldest 
in Rhode Island, in honor of a colonial governor. It 
recalls the trials our forefathers endured for civil and 
religious liberty for themselves and their children. 

Henry Bull was born in England in 1610. On July 17, 
1635, when twenty-five years old, he sailed from London 
to America in the ship James. In 1636, he and his wife 
Elizabeth, were members of the church in Roxbury, but 
on November 20, 1637, he with others was warned to 
deliver up all guns, pistols, swords, powder, shot, etc., 
because "the opinions and revelations of Mr. Wheel- 
wright and Mrs. Hutchinson have seduced and led into 
dangerous error many of the people here in New Eng- 
land. " On March 7, 1637, he was one of the eighteen 
original settlers of Pocasset who signed the following 
compact strongly religious in its nature: 

"We whose names are underwritten do here solemnly 
in the presence of Jehovah incorporate ourselves into a 
Bodie Politick, and as he shall help will submit our persons, 
lives and estates unto our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of 
Kings and Lord of Lords and to all those perfect and abso- 



23 

lute laws of his given us in his holy word of truth, to be 
guided and judged thereby. " 

He was also one of nine to place his name to the agree- 
ment of April, 1639, of the settlers of Newport. 

The labors of man have greatly changed the place the 
early settlers found here, until a titled Englishman has 
called it the most beautiful watering place in the world. 
In ancient times it was a place of wolves and wild Indians. 
A river ran through what is now River lane, from Tanner 
street (now West Broadway). There was a spring on 
Spring street, near the foot of Barney street, and the town 
was built on both sides of it. Coddington, Easton, Clark 
and Bull had home lots laid out to them to the north of the 
spring. 

The first house in Newport was built by Governor 
Easton on his lot on Farewell street, to the north of where 
the Quaker meeting house now stands; it was burned by 
the Indians. Governor Coddington's house stood on 
Marlborough street. 

The Bull house is too substantial to have been built all 
at once in those early days. The date usually assigned 
to it is from 1638 to 1640, but it is almost certain that very 
little of the house as it stands goes back to the dates 
assumed. Tradition asserts that the southern end of the 
building is the older. 

During the years 1640, 1641 and 1642, Henry Bull, 
young and sturdy, served as town sergeant. He was also 
to suppress the sale of liquors. For many years he served 



24 

as deputy and in the years 1685, 1686 and 1690 as governor 
of this colony. It was during his term as chief magistrate, 
that Rhode Island's rights were attacked by Governor 
Andros, but Rhode Island fared better than the other 
colonies and managed to obtain its ancient charter. 

Governor Bull married three times and every generation 
of his descendants has been prominent in public affairs. 
It is well to pause before the home of an early settler who 
was of a character like that of Henry Bull, and whose 
descendants are such as his. It is such an example which 
will impress the children of all races among us that they 
must educate themselves to perform the duties of citizen- 
ship. 

WILLIAM PAINE SHEFFIELD, Jr. 




o 



GILBERT STUART 



The Address of William B. Weeden, August 8, 1906 



Gilbert Stuart's father, having fought with the pretender 
at Culloden, according to tradition, fled to America and 
established a snuff-mill in the upper gorge of the Peta- 
quamscott. The mill has been replaced by a saw-mill, 
but the cottage, fairly preserved, stands as it was. In it 
the artist was born in 1755. 

The inevitable tendency of temperament was revealed 

early in the boy. 

At thirteen, he painted the Bannisters— portraits now 
in the Redwood Library. Crude pictures, they were like 
the sitters. At sixteen, he painted a portrait of his own 
father. In the previous year, he had studied under Cosmo 
Alexander, a fairly capable instructor. 

Alexander took Stuart to England, promising him every 
opportunity for instruction in his art. Unfortunately 
the patron died and the protegee who was studying at the 
University of Glasgow could not sustain himself. He could 
earn by his brush a simple support, but was not able to 
dress and spend like his fellow students. He came home 
by the way of Nova Scotia, in a collier, experiencing a 
very hard and trying voyage. 



26 

Though he spent rather less than two years in England 
on his first visit, he sharpened his facilities at the most 
impressible season of youth. Coming home, he could 
draw portraits well enough to obtain sitters among the 
wealthy Jews of Rhode Island. His fame extended to 
Philadelphia, where his uncle, Mr. Anthony, was proud of 
his ingenious nephew, and employed him to paint a portrait 
of himself, and of his wife and children. In this early work 
he learned to paint by painting, but did not rest contented 
with his meagre information. 

In Newport, he painted and studied from life under the 
difficulties of the time. Clubbing with his friend Water- 
house, they hired a "strong-muscled blacksmith" for a 
model at a half a dollar an evening. The country and the 
times were unfavorable for art. In the spring of 1775, the 
last ship leaving Boston Port carried our artist bound for 
London. 

At twenty-two years of age Stuart was domiciled with 
Sir Benjamin West, receiving instruction in West's studio, 
and allowed at times to contribute incidental work to the 
master's pictures. His capacity and facility in color 
fast made its way. But it did not depend on methods or 
any tricks of art. As West indicated very clearly to 
some of his pupils, "It is of no use to steal Stuart's colors; 
if you want to paint as he does you must steal his eyes. " 
The spirit of the artist expressed itself in music as well as 
in color. He fortuitously stumbled on a position as 
organist at £30 per year; which helped to support him in 
his novitiate. 



27 

The first picture that brought our artist into notice was 
a full length portrait of Mr. Grant, a Scotch gentleman. 
Coming for the first sitting in very cold weather, Grant 
remarked, that it was a better time for skating and pro- 
posed an expedition out of doors. Stuart had learned to 
strike out on the Pettaquamscott River; his celerity now 
brought crowds to witness on the Serpentine, the sporting 
place of London. The occasion prompted him to post 
Grant when the sitting came to pass, as a skater with a 
winter-scene in the back ground. Baretti an Italian 
coming accidentally into Stuart's room when the portrait 
was nearly finished, exclaimed, "What a charming picture ! 
Who, but the great artist West could have painted such 
an one?" Stuart confessed that the picture was all his 
own. It was exhibited at Somerset House, attracting 
so much notice that the artist was afraid to go to the 
academy to meet the looks and inquiries of the multitude. 

Not long after he established himself in London, painting 
portraits at prices only less than those obtained by 
Reynolds and Gainsborough. His rendering in character 
in the sitter was original and masterly, as was his use of 
color. Picturesque in his own conversation, he could draw 
forth a statesman, general, or farmer, in the essential 
nature of each, and place his sitter literally in the best 
light. Dr. Waterhouse, a competent authority, knowing 
him thoroughly, said that in conversation and " Confabu- 
lation" as the critic expressed it, no man was his superior. 
He kept the sitter talking, drawing out his inmost char- 



28 

acteristics, for he could enter into any man. With 
soldiers, he would go into battle, with statesmen he would 
discourse on Gibbon or Hume; with lawyers, merchants 
or men of leisure, each in his own way ; and with ladies in 
all ways. 

If he would set forth a farmer on canvass, he would 
surprise the subject not only by bringing out the nice 
points of horses and cattle, but by profound knowledge 
of manures, and of the food of plants. It was said that, 
his wit was ample and sometimes redundant. 

The humble boy of Pettaquamscott had become a lead- 
ing artist, favored by the Court of England, petted by 
aristocratic society, a central figure in the most brilliant 
circles of London. The ardent nature of his Scottish 
loyalist father, joined to the serene English temper of his 
mother had formed a typical artist. Yet there was some- 
thing ampler and larger in this man — something hardly 
formulated and quite unappreciated in the purely English 
mind. England was just beginning to learn what 
colonial expansion meant, how the face of the civilized 
world was to be changed by the expansive principle. 
Children of the little island transplanted to a far away 
continent were being enlarged thereby and were giving 
expression to new continental ideas. 

Stuart had painted the King; he now burned to portray 
the greatest man of the time — Washington, the Father 
of his Country. Going back to his own land, he settled 
in Philadelphia in 1792, to embody on canvass, that 



2 9 

"noble personification of wisdom and goodness, known 
to subsequent generations as Stuart's Washington." As 
Ralph Waldo Emerson put it, "He would seem to have 
absorbed into that face all the serenity of these United 

States." 

We might fill the hour with entertaining matter drawn 
from his talk and play of character. He had wit, satire 
and anecdote without limit, for any occasion. When he 
did not fascinate, he often frightened his companions. 
Of his original and creative force there are ample testi- 
monials. 

Never jealous of his competitors, the artist had many 
troubles with sitters. When a picture went wrong, he 
would discard it as lumber, and no remonstrance or petition 
could induce him to resume it. Friends would not be 
satisfied with a portrait. Once after several trials, all 
lost temper; the mercurial artist dropped his palate and 
took snuff, exclaiming, "what a— -business is this of a 
portrait painter; you bring him a potato and expect he 
will paint you a peach. " 

After a brief sojourn in Washington, he removed to 
Boston in 1803. He painted many fine portraits there, 
but his powers failed, until gout ended his life in 1828. 
His convivial habits beguiled, while improvidence and 
poverty embarrassed him. 

It is easy to cry out genius when the narrator and critic 
fails to comprehend and render forth the essential nature 
of the subject in hand. Yet we can hardly treat this great 



3° 

artist without bringing in the unformulated characteristics 
of genius. We have alluded to his extraordinary gifts 
for drawing out the inmost character of a sitter. This 
process resulted from powers far more potent than tact 
and dexterity. To put it briefly, his own well was deep 
and broad enough to contain the casual visitor dropped 
into it. Washington Allston knew his ground, as he said 
of him, "his mind was of a strong and original cast, his 
perceptions as clear as they were just, and in the power of 
illustration he has rarely been equalled. " 

He could not have rendered the frontier surveyor and 
militia general into a Roman senator — into the yet larger 
statesman of the coming America — had not his mind 
embraced in itself something universal; genius in short. 
Narrowing our view to a detail; the wise have differed in 
discussing his color, his especial field of art; some contend- 
ing that his tints are too strong. But if we regard the 
whole man it would seem that he used color according to 
Titian — to convey the deepest ideas of the artist. 

WILLIAM B. WEEDEN 




A FEW ROD^ 
HIS SPOT STut 

HOUSE 



&V Q] 



I I I A MS 








>W»-* ,v| I ) ■ ■» I 



STILL FLOWS 
THE 

ROGER WILLIAM 
SPRIN' 



THE HOUSE AND HOME-LOT OF 
ROGER WILLIAMS 



By Mr. Norman M. Isham 
October 2, 1906 



Tradition puts the site of the Roger Williams house 
near the northeast corner of North Main and Howland 
streets. Upon the house which now occupies that corner, 
the State of Rhode Island, acting through this Society, 
has [just] placed a tablet of bronze affirming as a fact that 
a few rods east of this spot did actually stand the house of 
the founder of the State. It is proper, then, to explain 
what is known of the home lot and the house of the 
founder. 

Briefly, then, it is certain that Roger Williams lived on 
the home lot whereon the tablet says his house stood. 
That, of course, would ordinarily be enough. But the 
tablet points to a particular part of the home lot and must 
therefore be justified still further. 

It is certain, then, that the spot which the tablet indi- 
cates is the traditional site for the house. 

It is nearly certain that this traditional site of the house 
has never, in all the changes of the estate, been covered by 
any structure. 



3* 

It is certain that there are still fragments of a wall and 
some other remains of stonework on that site, and we are 
of the opinion that what is there should be looked upon as 
the hearth of Roger Williams. 



Roger Williams lived on the home lot of which this 
property was a part. 

The home lot seems to have descended to Daniel 
Williams, and from him to his son, Roger. 

In 1 7 13, April 30th, Charles Dyer, in selling the lot north 
of this to Nathaniel Brown (D. B. II, P. 300) bounds south 
on the heirs of Daniel Williams. No interest of the other 
heirs of Roger Williams appears except in a deed from Ben- 
jamin Wright to Joseph Williams, son of Daniel, of the 
Throckmorton lot, next south, in which he bounds on the 
north with the heirs of Roger Williams, deceased. This 
was on June 2d, 17 18. (D. B. IV, 20). On May 18th, 
1723, Joseph Williams sells to Jabez Bo wen, the physician, 
a corner, 40 by 80, from this Throckmorton lot (D. B. V, 
331), and he bounds on the north on his brother Roger 
Williams. How Roger acquired the whole title we do 
not know. 

Roger Williams by his deed of September 25th, 1742 
(D. B. XI, 10), sells to Jabez Bowen a strip ten feet wide 
and eighty feet deep on the north side of the latter's 
homestead, and he says it is a part of his grandfather's 
home lot. 



33 

Finally by deed of July 25th, 1748 (D. B. XII, 261), 
Roger Williams sells to Nehemiah Sprague, a lot 40 by 60, 
west on Town street, and this land he says, "is the 
northwest corner of that lot that was my Hon. Grand- 
father Roger Williams whereon he dwelt." The north 
line of the deeded land was the north line of the home 
lot. 

This is direct and positive evidence. It only remains to 
show that this lot, sold in 1748, is a part of the property 
before us. 

For this 40 by 60 lot did not include all of the present 
estate. On July 13th, 1754, Roger Williams sold to his 
son-in-law, Jonathan Tourtellot, a strip four feet wide on 
the south of this lot and a piece 44 by 80 on the east or 
up-hill side of it. (D. B. XIII, 379.) 

In the meantime Nehemiah Sprague had, on December 
28th, 1748 (D. B. XII, 262), sold to Simeon Hunt the old 
40 by 60 lot on the Town street, and Simeon Hunt, 
October 25th, 1749 (D. B. XII, 308), transferred the land 
to Joseph Owen. 

Owen probably built his house soon after on this front 
lot. On July 19th, 1754 (D. B. XIII, 389), he bought of 
Jonathan Tourtellot, the lot eastward of his own with the 
four foot gangway strip. This was just six days after 
Tourtellot's deed from Williams. 

It is on this rear lot that it is claimed the old house had 
stood. We now have the lot complete, and, except for 
some diminutions, as it is now. 



34 

Roger Williams, March 6th, 1755, deeded to David 
Thayer, his son-in-law, all the rest of the home lot. 
(D. B. XV, 74.) 

On August 13th of the same year, 1755, Joseph Owen 
received from Thayer the deed of a lot south of his original 
front lot, bounding 40 feet west on the Town street, and 
extending back 140 feet, the total depth of his other two 
lots. It is bounded north on Joseph Owen " where he now 
dwells." (D.B.XV, 53.) 

Now, on November 17th, 1755 (D. B. XV, 65), Owen 
sold to Benjamin Bowen, son of his southern neighbor, 
Col. Jabez, a strip 13 feet wide and 140 feet long on the 
south side of his north lot, that is, right through his 
holding. This, though not in its present place exactly 
is the future Howland street. 

Now let us go back to the lots north of Howland street, 
for they are our chief concern. 

Joseph Owen sold, February 20th, 1761, the lot of land 
and dwelling house "where I now live" (D. B. XVI, 
103), to Levi Whipple. More than half the gangway, 
now Howland treets appears in this deed, but its location 
has shifted northward. 

Levi Whipple sold to Joseph Hart, July 9th, 1762 (D. B. 
XVI, 201). 

Joseph Hart mortgaged the property to John Dennie, of 
Boston, October 23d, 1762 (D. B. XVI, 204), and the 
mortgagee assigned to Devonshire and Reave of Bristol, 
England, from whom it came to Moses Brown (D. B. XIX, 



35 

419), who sold, November 25th, 1783, to Simeon Hunt 
Olney. (D. B. XIX, 419.) 

From Joshua Newell and his wife, Olney had already, 
October 6th, 1783 (D. B. XIX, 424), bought their interest 
in the estate which they probably had in some way of 
inheritance from Joseph Hart. 

From Olney the land went to his daughter, Anstis, wife 
of Samuel Brown. Brown sold April 9th, 1840, to James 
Hazard, a colored man who built the present house, 
(D. B.LXXV, 215). 

Hazard sold August 4th, 1842, to Dr. Samuel B. Tobey, 
(D. B.LXXXIII, 231). 

Tobey sold 1843, to Arba B. Dike, who 

sold in February, 1853, to Benjamin R. Almy, (D. B. 
L XXXIV, 232). 

B. R. Almy sold to his brother, Humphrey Almy, whose 
heirs now hold the property. 

II. 

This is the traditional site of Roger Williams' house. 

In a letter dated July 17th, 1S19, printed in the Rhode 
Island American of July 20th, 1819, Wheeler Martin, 
discussing the location of the grave and of the house of 
Williams quotes Capt. Nathaniel Packard as follows: 

"Capt. Nathaniel Packard told me that when he was a 
boy he used to play in a cellar which had a large peach 
tree in it, which cellar was situated on a lot back of the 
house built by Thomas (he meant Joseph) Owen, father of 



36 

the late Honorable Daniel Owen, afterwards owned by 
Levi Whipple, and now owned by the heirs of the late 
Simeon H. Olney, directly north of the house owned by 
Ezra Hubbard, and near where an outbuilding now stands." 

This fixes the spot very nearly, for Packard owned, after 
1767, the lot east of the one we are discussing. It also goes 
to prove that the deeds seem to show, that the house on the 
lot in the eighteenth century was built by Joseph Owen. 

"The people at that time" continues Packard's testi- 
mony, "called it Roger Williams' cellar. " Packard, who 
lived fron 1730 to 1801, was born and died, says Martin, 
in a small house on the west side of Main street just south 
of Philip Allen's. In this the Tax List of 1798 agrees. 
Packard's widow testified to much the same effect. 

Again, Theodore Foster, in a letter to Williams Thayer, 
dated May 21st, 1819, and printed in the Rhode Island 
American of July 16th, the same year, says that Mrs. Mary 
Tripe told him on May 12th, 1813, that the foundations of 
Roger Williams' house still remained, and she pointed it 
out to him from her house. In 1819 he says he could not 
find these ruins on his last visit to Providence. 

About i860 came Stephen Randall armed with these 
traditions, and perhaps similar ones from other sources, 
and he went to a certain spot and proceeded to dig. He 
found a fragment of wall, more or less, enough to satisfy 
him that he had uncovered the foundation of his ancestor's 
house. 



37 

In 1867 the present stable on the estate was built. In 
digging for a drain at this time a piece of wall was cut 
through about in a line with the excavations of Mr. 
Randall. 

It may seem strange that the house was pushed so far 
toward the north line of the old home lot. Why was it not 
in the middle? 

The answer to this question is given by the location of 
the spring which still flows on the other side of the street. 
It was to be nearer this that the house was placed so far 
north. For the well belonging to the homestead still 
exists under the front door of the present house on North 
Main street, and this well was placed there either because 
it tapped the vein which feeds the famous spring, or because 
it was a spring in itself. 

III. 

This land was always open. No house of any kind, 
large or small, ever stood upon it since the old house was 
destroyed. 

This raises the question: when was the old house de- 
stroyed? We do not know. It seems probable, however, 
that it was burnt in one of the Indian attacks and that 
Roger Williams, who was then about 73 years old, did not 
rebuild, but went to live with his son Daniel, in the lower 
part of the Town street. 

We infer the burning of Roger Williams' house from the 
accounts of contemporary historians who say that nearly 



33 

all the town was destroyed. Hubbard says that not 
above three houses were left standing. {New and Further 
Narrative,!?. 13.) William Harris says : " The enemy hath 
burnt — all moste all in Providence." {R. I. Hist. Coll. 
X, 174.) 

Daniel Williams, at what time and in what way is not 
known, obtained a home lot at the south end of the town 
between Nicholas Power on the north and William Hopkins 
on the south, that is to say, the second home share south 
of the present Power street, once the propery of the widow, 
Jane Sears. On this lot he seems to have lived, and here 
we feel very certain that his father lived with him after 
the burning of his own home in 1676, and the death of his 
wife which Austin puts in the same year. 

For, on the 24th of August, 17 10, Daniel addressed a 
letter to the Town Purchasers in which he told them 
sundry things, and in which he said: "he gave away all 
so that he had nothing to help himself, so that he being not 
in a way to get for his supply and being ancient, it must 
needs pinch somewhere. I do not desire to say what I have 
done for both father and mother. I judge they wanted 
nothing that was convenient for ancient people &c. " 
(Knowles Memoir of Roger Williams, p. no. Original in 
Providence Town Papers.) 

Let us now consider what evidence there may be on 
either side of the question whether another house was ever 
built on the site. 

A. That the spot was empty. 



39 

a. No deed till 1755 speaks of a house on any part of 
the lot. As Joseph Owen bought the land in 1748 (that 
is the front 60 feet) it is to be assumed that he built a house 
soon after. Capt. Packard says he built a house there. 
Owen bought the back lot from Jonathan Tourtellot, 
July 13th, 1754 (13 : 379), and no house is mentioned. 
It was therefore clear at that date. The house referred to 
in the deed of 1755 was certainly on the front part of the 
lot. 

b. Capt. Packard told Wheeler Martin that the spot 
was open and spoke as though it had always been. He 
expressly says it was behind the Owen house. 

c. Mrs. Mary Tripe showed the ruins to Foster in 1813. 

d. The tax list of 1798 says there were on the lot a 
wooden house of two stories, very old, a shop 14 by 20, and 
a wood house 13 by 10^. Not a collection likely to cover 
the whole of a lot 33^2 by 140. 

e. The tax list of 18 14 mentions only a house. 

B. That the spot was not empty. 

a. In 1770 the house and land were held by Rev. 
David S. Rowland as a tenant of absentee landlords. He, 
as we know from a letter of Moses Brown, assignee of 
the mortgage held by these landlords, made valuable 
improvements. In 1779, when Levi Whipple, a former 
owner was there a tenant, there was a stable on the place 
which was very likely one of the improvements of the 
minister. 



40 

b. In Moses Brown's deed to Simeon H. Olney, this 
stable appears. 

The location of this stable which does not appear in 
1 798, would, if we could absolutely fix it, prove or disprove 
our point. Now, the most probable location for the 
stable on this as on other estates, was the extreme back 
of the lot where the present stable is. If the stable had 
stood on what would naturally be the yard or garden and 
had thus covered the site of the ancient house, it would 
have cut the lot in two most awkwardly. Capt. Packard 
would have remembered the stable and so would Mrs. 
Tripe, if it had stood over the house and if they knew 
where the house was. 

And they did know. Mr. Packard had played in the 
cellar. It is hard to imagine that, if that cellar had been 
covered in his time with a stable he would not have known 
it. Finally, it is possible that the old shop and the stable 
were the same. On the whole, it seems almost certain 
that the site was always open. 

IV. 

There are now on the site, below the surface, some 
fragments of wall and other stonework. Photographs 
of them are in the possession of the R. I. Historical Society 
for any one to examine. Mr. Almy testifies that the 
excavations are on the spot dug into by Mr. Stephen 
Randall. 



41 

Mr. Weston and I met Mr. A. L. Almy, the architect, 
one of the present owners, on September 18th, on the lot. 
Mr. Almy showed us the present arrangement and pointed 
out the place where when he was a boy he saw Mr. Randall 
dig, as well as the place where, in digging the drain, the 
workmen encountered the wall again. Mr. Weston and I, 
as a sub-committee charged with the placing of the tab- 
let, thought we ought to check Mr. Randall's discov- 
eries if we could. Mr. Almy agreed to allow any amount 
of digging and accordingly, a man who was obtained from 
Mr. Admas, the mason, was put to work on September 
19th. We began about nine feet back from the bank and 
trenched westward. We soon struck wall, and continuing, 
unearthed a large flat stone. Turning north and south we 
laid bare a section of wall over three feet long and sixteen 
inches thick, standing eight or ten inches above the flat 
stone alluded to. More flat stones appeared, and traces 
of wall on the north were visible. 

The work had to be done very carefully, much of it (on 
hands and knees) with a trowel and brush. We dug at the 
north in the line of the wall, but found nothing, though 
we went down in the sand which underlies the site to a 
point from which the sounding rod would reach hard pan. 
The wall had never extended in this direction. A search 
on the south was equally fruitless, as the drain excavation 
had evidently destroyed the wall at this point. Nothing 
was to be looked for on the west for the bank wall with 
the excavation for the yard had cut off everythng. 



42 

Clay appeared in some of the joints of the wall on the 
inside. The outside seemed to be laid dry. Clay also 
appeared in the joints between the flat stones west of the 
wall, and a heap of clay was found lying upon these stones. 
It looked very much as if it had been put there, and 
appeared also under one of the stones as if used for 
mortar between it and the one below. 

When the ruins were cleared, September 20th, we had 
them photographed from several different points of view. 
Measurements were taken of them, and they were located 
from the bank wall and from the lines of Howland street, 
and from North Main street. The grade of Howland 
street was also taken with a level and the height of the 
flat stone of the ruin was taken above a point on the curb 
at North Main Street. 

V. 

These fragments, just described, are, in our opinion, the 
remains of the fireplace and the chimney of Roger Williams' 
house. The flat stones arranged as they are, the fragment 
of wall where the back of the chimney should be, with all 
the characteristics of such a chimney back, heat cracks 
and all, the trace of a jamb, faint though it be, on the north, 
all point to this conclusion. 

When the house was burnt or otherwise destroyed, we 
believe the former, the chimney stood for some years as 
one near the state farm wall is still standing, as the King 
chimney is still, and as a chimney or more in various parts 
of the state are standing. 



43 



Bye and bye it fell, and as the upper parts went first 
the debris gradually covered the lower parts and protected 
them. After many years, with the ground unoccupied, 
as we have tried to show this was, there would be only a 
green mound, covered with weed or grass, troublesome to 
spade or plough, and hence left alone. Sentiment too 
may have had some effect even among our forefathers. 
Who knows? At any rate, there can be shown to any one 
who desires proof of this statement, the remnants of certain 
old stacks which have gone that way to destruction and 
are in the condition described. 

In conclusion, can we tell anything from our find as to 
the form and size of Roger Williams' house? The find 
simply strengthens the claim made in Early R. I. Houses, 
that the ancient houses of the town were like the Roger 
Mowry house, one room, story-and-a-half affairs, with a 
stone chimney at the end turned toward the hill. The 
fire room, lower room or hall, was 15 or 16 feet by 17, 
and about 6)4 feet high. The roof was very steep. The 
foundation, as in this case was very shallow, and if there 
was a cellar under the house it was simply a hole with 
sloping sides, a place to keep potatoes from freezing, or 
what they had in place of potatoes, and reached either on 
the outside from the lower ground of the sloping hillside, 
or from within by a trap door. Most likely the latter, on 
account of prowling animals. 

In concluding this report we have merely to say that 
we have attempted to set forth the results of an inquiry 



44 

into the claims of the traditional site of the house, and to 
give to the society the sources known to us, with the exca- 
vations we have made. What we think does not bind any 
one. The facts do. If any one therefore, objects to the 
reading of the sources and the excavation which we have 
set forth, we are glad to set before him the data we have 
had, so that he can, like a good Rhode Islander, form his 
own opinion. 

NORMAN MORRISON ISHAM. 



FORT INDEPENDENCE 



Paper read by C. S. Brigham 
May 16, 1907 



The battle of Bunker Hill, on June 17, 1775, gave 
warning to the country that a long and exhausting conflict 
was at hand. Rhode Island in common with the other 
colonies immediately took steps to place herself upon a 
war footing and adopted such precautions as seemed 
expedient to guard against the incursions of the enemy. 
The town of Providence, easily approached by water, 
was open to attack from the British ships of war stationed 
at Newport. A beacon was ordered to be erected at 
the Providence town meeting of July 3, 1775, and was 
completed during the following month. At a meeting held 
on July 31st, it was ordered that fortifications should be 
built at Fox Point, and intrenchments "hove up between 
Fields and Sassafras Points of sufficient capacity to cover 
a body of men ordered there on any emergency. " 

The construction of the works at Fields Point was 
immediately begun. Solomon Drowne in a letter to 
his brother, William, dated August 12, 1775, says: "One 
da}' last week Mr. Compton, with one of the Light Infantry 
drummers and two of the Cadet fifers, went round to 



46 

notify the sons of freedom who had the public good and 
safety at heart to repair to Hacker's wharf, with such 
implements as are useful in intrenching, where a boat was 
ready to take them on board and transport them to the 
shore between Sassafras and Fields Point. About sixty 
of us went in a packet, many had gone before, some in 
J. Brown's boat, &c, so when all had got there the number 
was not much short of 200. I don't know that ever I 
worked harder a day in my life before. With what had 
been done by a number that went the day before, we threw 
up a breastwork that extended near one quarter of a mile. 
A large quantity of bread was carried down, and several 
were off catching quahaugs, which were cooked for dinner 
a la mode de Indian. The channel runs at not a great 
distance from this shore so that when cousin Wallace 
comes up to fire our town, his men who work the ship can 
easily be picked down by small arms, from our intrench- 
ment, which is designed principally for musqueteers." 
(Field Revoluntionary Defences in R. I. p. 57.) 

Corroborating the information contained in this letter, 
there is a bill rendered by William Compton, the town 
sergeant, containing this item: "August 2, to warning 
the town to work on fortifications, — 4 — o. " A notice 
regarding the beacon printed in the Gazette of August 
12, 1775, mentions the fact that "a strong battery, and 
intrenchment on the river" have been erected. The 
Providence Gazette of August 26 reports on August 22, 
when some British ships-of-war came up the Bay, the 



THESE 

WERE THROWN UP 

IN 1775 

AND STRENGTHENED 

IN 1814 



47 

inhabitants manned the battery at Fox Point and "an 
intrenchment on the River. " These intrenchments were 
evidently erected on the brow of the bluff overlooking 
the river and extended from Sassafras Point toward 
Fields Point. There is little now remaining except the 
breastworks at the northernmost extremity of the line 
and it is this redoubt, strengthened during the War of 
1812, that is marked to-day. 

The intrenchments near Sassafras Point were intended 
largely for riflemen. A fort of somewhat more pretentious 
size was required to guard the approach to Providence. 
At a town meeting held October 26, 1775, a committee 
was appointed "to direct where, and in what manner, 
fortifications shall be made upon the hill to the southward 
of the house of William Field." This old house, the 
ancestral home of the Fields, was demolished in 1896. 

At this same town meeting of October 26, it was voted 
"that the part of the town below the Gaol Lane (Meeting 
street), on the east side of the river, be required by warrant 
from the town clerk, as usual, by beat of drum, to repair 
to-morrow morning at 8 o'clock, to Fields Point, to make 
proper fortifications there ; to provide themselves with tools 
and provisions for the day, that the inhabitants capable 
of bearing arms, who dwell on the west side of the river, 
be required in the same manner to repair thither, for the 
same purpose, on Saturday next; and that the inhabitants 
of that part of the town to the northward of the Gaol 
Lane, be required, in the same manner, to repair thither 
for the same purpose on Monday next. " 



48 

The towns surrounding Providence contributed their 
assistance. In the Gazette of November 4, 1775, a notice 
was published requesting the inhabitants of Cranston, 
Johnston and North Providence to aid in completing the 
fortifications. 

The erecting of this fort was superintended by Barnard 
Eddy, and his bill to the town, still preserved in the records, 
shows the date of the fort's construction. 
Town of Providence to Barnard Eddy 

1775 

November 20 to i^days work William Field 

72 hands & his team at 12s per day o 18 o 

To Boards & Other Stuff to mend Wheale 

Barers and mack hand Barers o 8 o 

To 7 Days Work by William Field attend- 
ance on the men at the fortification at 
Ye per day 61 13 6 

2 19 6 

To 1 day of Joseph Eddy in going to Johns- 
ton for the Spars o 4 6 

To 24 days for myself from of November at 

5s per day 6 o o 

9 4 

Erors Excepted 
Barnard Eddy 

To 7 Spars of Obediah Brown for the Boam. . 12 — 1 
To 7 do of Samuel Winsor at 15s per ton 41 

feet — 1 5 0^/2 



10 11 s l A 
Barnard Eddy 



49 

The charges for boom and spars evidently relate to the 
boom and chain which was ordered to be stretched across 
the river at Fields Point as an obstruction to vessels 
entering the harbor. 

The hill upon which this fort was erected was called, 
possibly at that time, but surely within a few years later, 
Robin Hill. A plat of the William Field property, now 
in the City Record Office, dated 1816, shows the outline 
of the fort and calls it "Robin Hill Fort." The name, 
Fort Independence, by which recent generations have 
known the work, was evidently fastened upon it by later 
map-makers, somewhere about the middle of the 19th 
century. A writer in the Providence Press of August 7, 
1869, in referring to the fort as a relic of the War of 181 2, 
says : It is located "on Robin Hill, and is now called Fort 
Independence. An old gentleman now living in the city, 
who helped to construct some of the works, says it was 
originally called Fort Robin Hill. When or why the name 
was changed, it is impossible to say. " 

In the War of 181 2, the various fortifications at Fields 
Point were much strengthened and improved. The first 
action in this regard was taken on September 19, 18 14, 
when a large meeting of the citizens of Providence was 
held in the State House Parade for the purpose of taking 
concerted measures of defence against invasion. A 
committee of defence was appointed to supervise the 
construction of such fortifications as were deemed neces- 
sary. The military companies, the "gentlemen of the 
4 



5° 

bar," the masonic fraternity, the students at Brown 
University, the clergymen, the "people of color" and 
various other classes of citizens contributed their ser- 
vices. Within a fortnight earthworks were being thrown 
up in various quarters of the city. The newspapers of the 
day teem with notices for the prosecution of the work, 
and the original volume of records of the committee of 
defence, still preserved in the Historical Society, shows how 
strenuously the citizens worked to guard the town against 
invasion. The State, however, was never threatened, and 
the treaty of Ghent was signed before the fortifications 
were completed. 

It is related by a writer in the Providence Press of 
August 7th, 1869, that the fort at Robin Hill was con- 
structed by the United Train of Artillery, with the aid of 
citizens, and that a public procession headed by two 
clergymen of the city, Rev. Henry Edes, and Rev. J. 
Willson, marched out of the city to the site chosen for the 
work. The fort at the southeastern extremity of Fields 
Point, now called Fort William Henry, was erected at this 
time, and was the most pretentious of any then constructed. 

It is very fitting that these two Revolutionary forts 
should be thus marked, before the lapse of further years 
destroys our memory of them or alters the correctness of 
their traditions. So little do we of the present generation 
realize that the events of our own day are to be with the 
passing of years the events of the forgotten past and that 
facts familiar to us are to become the theme of research 



5i 

for the future antiquarian and historian. Likewise the 
participants in the stirring days of the Revolution and the 
War of 1812 seldom seemed aware of the fact that they 
were makers of history. Had they realized this point, 
they would have provided us with more definite informa- 
tion as to the origin of the names of these very forts which 
we are marking. They would not have obliged us to 
resort to out of the way sources to gleam our array of 
facts and even then come away but partly satisfied. They 
would not have caused some of us err in placing Robin Hill 
at Sassafras Point instead of in its proper location as a hill 
identical with Fort Independence. Our ancestors have 
much to answer for. Let us attempt by the preservation 
in bronze of these historic sites to provide a partial 
remedy that we may not be accused by posterity of the 

same charge. 

CLARENCE S. BRIGHAM. 



REYNOLDS HOUSE, BRISTOL 



Historical Address Delivered by Judge O. L. Bosworth at Ceremonies 

Attending the Placing of Tablet on House Occupied by 

Gen. Lafayette in 1778 



Mr. President, and members of the Rhode Island Historical 
Society, Ladies and Gentlemen: — 

To-day the scenes and events of one hundred and twenty 
eight years ago, come vividly before us — scenes stirring 
with romance, yet of the deepest significance and import- 
ance in our national history. 

This ancient domicile, its architecture peculiar to early 
New England, its quaint rooms, and more especially the 
room once occupied by him whose name to-day we honor, 
a name familiar throughout the length and breadth of our 
land, has an interest and charm known only to him who 
loves New England and her institutions. 

In September, 1778, a long-limbed, lean, lanky young 
man with a hook-nose, red hair and retreating forehead, 
so shy as to be almost ungainly, and so quiet as to be almost 
awkward, might be seen making his way to this house. 
His eye was bright and sharp, his look when interested 
was firm and high, and beneath his unattractive exterior 
lay an intelligence that denoted thought and mental 
capacity, and a heart stirred with high ideals of right and 



53 

justice for the benefit of his fellowmen. This young man 
was Monseigneur Marie Joseph Paul Yves Roch Gilbert, 
Damotier de Lafayette, son of a noble gentleman who six 
weeks before the birth of our hero, was killed while charg- 
ing an English battery at Mindeu. At the time of the 
birth of Lafayette the estates of his parents has become so 
depleted as to be insufficient to keep up the dignity of his 
family, or even to give him the education necessary to his 
rank and station. 

The date of his birth was September 6th, 1757, and the 
place was upon one of the green slopes of the Avergne 
Mountains in Southern France, in the fortified manor- 
house known as the Chateau of Chivaniac. Here in this 
old country mansion, half castle and half farm-house, 
which had withstood the ravages of time and tempest for 
nearly six hundred years, was born the boy destined to 
know but little else than the tempest of Revolution. 
As a youth the want of means appeared for a time to be a 
serious obstacle to the advancement of his ambition, or 
even to the securing of an education suited to his rank and 
station. At this point rich and influential relatives came 
to the aid of his mother and he was sent to school at Paris 
to begin his education as a gentleman of rank. Thus it 
would seem Lafayette, born in the midst of revolution and 
poverty, commenced his career a soldier by birth, a scholar 
by charity. 

In the year 1770 he suffered by death the loss of his 
mother, which was to him a great misfortune. 



54 

In the same year, however, the death of a grand-uncle 
gave him possession of a large estate, thus relieving his 
financial difficulties and placing in his hands the means of 
being more useful to his fellowmen, as the use of that 
income in later years proved. He was now a very rich and 
powerful nobleman with a future apparently as promising 
and happy as could be desired. His relatives and guard- 
ians now began when he was thirteen to arrange for him a 
suitable matrimonial alliance and finally the daughter of 
the Duke d'Ayen, a noble and wealthy peer of the realm 
was selected, and at the age of fourteen Lafayette was 
married to Mademoiselle Marie Adrienne Frangoise 
de'Noailles, a girl of twelve. This proved a happy 
union, and this bride of twelve years became a comfort 
and support to him, even when the shadows of fife and of 
the prison of Olmutz had gathered darkly around him. 

At this period we find Lafayette young and wealthy, 
with a royal lineage, connected by a happy marriage 
with a powerful and wealthy family, and apparently 
with all that youth and wealth can give planning for the 
welfare and liberty of mankind. He is uneasy and 
anxious and he feels the impulse of destiny. He has 
listened to the story of the Duke of Gloucester at a dinner 
with the French Commandment at Metz, has heard in 
that story that the peasants in America had had a fight 
with British soldiers at a place called Lexington and 
Concord, and that these peasants were of the lower order 
who needed the strong hand to put them down; and then 



55 

and there he anxiously questioned the Duke as to who 
these rebel peasants were, and why they were in rebellion, 
and the Duke explained as best he could what was the 
cause of the trouble, and added that though "the peasants 
of America are a plucky lot, still as all the gentlemen of 
the colonies seemed to be loyal to the King, the peasants 
had no chance of success unless by some chance leaders 
and officers of experience turned in and helped them." 
The heart and soul of Lafayette had now become enlisted 
in the cause of freedon, and it soon became known that he 
intended to go to America to fight for those whom Duke of 
Gloucester had been pleased to call "American peasants." 
To use his own words "I could think of nothing but this 
enterprise and I resolved to go to Paris at once to make 
further inquiries." 

This information came to the ears of his father-in-law, 
who used every means in his power to prevent his son-in- 
law from going to America, but without success. Lafayette 
was now thoroughly aroused to what he felt his duty to 
the people of America and he resolved at the risk of his 
life and fortune to aid them in their struggle for liberty 
against the strongest nation of the world. To this end he 
sought and obtained an interview with Silas Deane and 
Benjamin Franklin, who were then our American agents at 
Paris. At this interview he told them of his willingness to 
aid their cause and said, "I am going to buy a ship to 
take your officers and supplies to America in it. It is 
precisely in time of danger that I wish to share whatever 



56 

fortune may have in store for you." This he set about at 
once and purchased a small sloop named "Victory." 
In this he sailed from Bordeaux, but without necessary 
papers, and after many adventures, in spite of remon- 
strances of his father-in-law and friends, and in spite of 
the King of France, steered for America. 

On the twenty-seventh of July, Lafayette and his 
companions, one of them being Baron de Kalb, arrived in 
Philadelphia and assuming that their troubles were over, 
started to wait upon the President of Congress with their 
letters of introduction from Silas Deane and Benjamin 
Franklin. 

As the Congress was unwilling to give the two officers the 
major generals commission they had asked for Lafayette 
with that determination of purpose and with that con- 
sistency to our cause which ever characterized him as a 
soldier and as a friend of Washington said, "If Congress 
will not accept me as a Major General, behold! I will 
fight for American liberty as a volunteer." 

He then wrote a letter to Congress setting out his desire 
to be of sen-ice to America, requesting that he be allowed 
to serve as a volunteer without pay. That was a most 
unusual request and proposition, and Hancock and Con- 
gress were surprised and most favorably impressed with 
the young nobleman and his lofty sentiments, and on the 
first day of July, 1777, Lafayette at the age of nineteen 
was appointed by Congress as Major General in the army 
of the United State. He now requested to be allowed to 



57 

serve near Washington, but Washington did not look 
with favor upon a young French nobleman, who was only 
a boy and who had run away from home. When he learned, 
however, of Lafayette 's offer and determination to serve 
the cause without pay, he was interested in him and 
desired to see and know him better. Washington seemed 
to have seen at once the sterling traits of his character, 
and the making of a leader of great value to the American 
cause, for he at once invited Lafayette to join his staff as a 
volunteer aid, and to make his headquarters his home. 
Lafayette was now anxious to see service and the oppor- 
tunity soon came in the attempt by Washington to check 
the advance of General Howe, Cornwallis and Knyphausen 
at Brandywine. Here in this, the first battle in which 
Lafayette was engaged, he received his baptism of fire 
and blood. Here he was wounded and here too he showed 
he was worthy of all that Deane and Franklin had said of 
him or all that Washington had hoped. Plunging into the 
thickest of the fight he threw himself from his horse and 
with sword in hand bravely attempted to check the 
Hessian advance and stem the tide of battle, but numbers 
often outweigh valor, and finally Lafayette was obliged 
when night came on to fall back. In this action he 
was wounded, but such was his interest and intense 
anxiety that he did not know it until after the battle. 
The gallant manner in which the young Marquis behaved 
in this engagement won for him commendation and 
praise, and when Washington wrote to Congress his 



5S 

account of the battle, he mentioned the bravery and 
ability of Marquis de Lafayette. 

On the recommendation of Washington he was by 
Congress appointed to the command of the Virginia 
division on December 4th. 1777. — a Major General in 
active command at twenty-two. 

Earlv in May. 177S. an event happened which had 
been long looked for and most earnestly sought for by 
every true American, armed interference in the affairs 
of America and a treaty of commerce and alliance with 
France. For this Lafayette had in France and in this 
countrv worked long and earnestly. This alhance it 
would seem, when we consider the condition of our army, 
our finances and the reverses which had just previously 
befallen the colonies, was the one thing necessary to sus- 
tain our waning struggle for independence. Who shall 
sav what would have been our fate had not the French 
come to our relief? Who can estimate the services of 
Lafayette to bring about this result? Is it unfair or 
unreasonable to at least say that Lafayette may have 
been the indirect influence that gave us the victory over 
our enemies in our struggle for liberty? 

This intelligence sent sunshine throughout the gloom of 
Valley Forge. The British now in an attempt to fall back 
upon Xew York gave opportunity for Lafayette to again 
displav his quickness and decision in military maneuvers. 
Generals Howe and Clinton planned for the capture of the 
Marquis and felt sure of success. They considered that 



59 

his capture would have great weight in Europe, and the 
plan came near fulfillment. He was practically surrounded 
by the three divisions of the English army. Lafayette by 
maneuvering his troops so as to give the appearance of 
forming his whole army in battle, deceived the British 
into preparing for a general engagement, and while they 
were forming for the battle he slipped away across the 
Schuylkill with his whole army without the loss of a man. 
Washington was delighted with Lafayette's timely and 
handsome retreat, which he considered victory for the 
Marquis. 

The next morning it was found that the British had 
stolen away in the night. The honors of this important 
engagement were with Washington and Lafayette. Lafay- 
ette now was sent with two thousand men to march over- 
land from the Hudson to Providence to support the French 
naval attack which it was thought would be made at New- 
port, but the French fleet sailed away without engaging 
the British. 

At this time while the British were in possession of 
Rhode Island, Lafayette, with Generals Sullivan and 
Greene, was ordered to expel the British from the state, 
and it was while engaged in this work that Lafayette 
made his headquarters in this house. No better ac- 
count of his sojourn here can be found than that given 
by Professor Munro in his Story of the Mount Hope 
Lands. He writes: "In September, 1778, Lafayette 
took the command of the ports about the Island of Rhode 



6o 

Island. His principal corps was stationed at Bristol. 
He was intrusted with the care of Warren, Bristol and the 
eastern shore, as he himself writes to General Washington 
in a letter dated 'Camp near Bristol, September 7, 1778.' 
Another letter is dated 'Bristol near Rhode Island." 
On the 27th of September he writes, 'I have removed my 
station from Bristol and am in a safer place behind 
Warren.' During his stay in this town, the Marquis 
lived in the house of Joseph Reynolds, upon Bristol Neck. 
Mrs. Reynolds the great-grandmother of the present 
owner of the house, had been informed of the approach of 
her noble guest, and had made suitable preparations for 
his reception. More than an hour before the time which 
had been appointed for his coming, a young Frenchman 
rode up to the house, and dismounting, tied his horse to a 
tree which stood near it. Plainly, one of the general's 
attendants, thought Mrs. Reynolds, and her negro servant, 
Cato, was at once sent to conduct him to the room designed 
for the subordinate officers. The young man expressed a 
desire for something to eat, and he was accordingly seated 
at the table which had been prepared for his commander, 
though his hostess wondered greatly that he could not 
control his appetite until a more appropriate hour. The 
officer ate very heartily of the dinner that was placed before 
him, but sat so long at the table that Mrs. Reynolds was 
forced to address him, and to remind him that his general 
was momentarily expected, when, to her intense amaze- 
ment, the young man announced that he was the visitor 



6i 

whose arrival the household were so eagerly awaiting." 
Lafayette then went to Boston to induce Count d'Estaing 
to assist the army at Newport — this the Count promised 
to do, but the British being heavily reinforced, Lafayette 
was obliged to go hastily back to lead the army out of 
danger, which he did with his accustomed vigorous and 
strategical manner. Now feeling that his services for a 
time were needed in France, he asked for a leave of absence, 
and he was by Congress granted a furlough with its official 
thanks and the gift of an elegant sword, and Lafayette 
was ordered carried by the best warship of our navy to 
France. 

He did not, although entertained, admired and flattered 
at home lose sight of the American cause and commenced 
to plan an attack by France and Spain on English ports 
and cities in aid of America. In this he was joined by 
Benjamin Franklin and John Paul Jones; but the failure of 
Spain to do her part crippled the expedition and it was 
finally given up, but defeat of the plan where the liberty 
of America was in the balance, did but discourage or 
dampen the ardor of this young Marquis whose life and 
soul seemed to be enlisted in our cause. His influence was 
now exerted to obtain help for us and his persistency finally 
carried the day. This effort was one the the masterly 
moves of Lafayette, and France, through his influence 
dispatched a fleet and army to our assistance. 

This did much towards our final triumph, and in this 
Lafayette deserves full credit, for he had obtained for us 
aid against even the royal will, without which we may 



62 

never have been a nation. In July, 1780, Count de 
Rochambeau arrived at Newport, and announced to Wash- 
ington that he was under his command. 

Lafayette and Knox now met Count de Rochambeau 
and a plan of operations was formed. Lafayette was 
then sent to drive out the British from Virginia, and the 
French fleet was to support him but failed, being driven 
back by the British. 

Lafayette was now obliged to carry out his land opera- 
tions unaided, and was so successful that Benedict Arnold, 
the traitor, and General Phillips were driven back. 
Cornwallis was much annoyed by Lafayette 's maneuvers 
and he determined to capture, as he called him, " that boy 
Lafayette." 

Lafayette had maneuvered so well that Cornwallis 
found himself entrapped and hemmed in by the arrival of 
the combined forces of Washington and Rochambeau. 

The American and French army aided by the navy of 
France now sat down to besiege the British defences at 
Yorktown. Lafayette had accomplished his desires. He 
had protected Virginia, forced Cornwallis into a corner 
and held him there until the allied armies arrived. The 
closing scenes of the American Revolution were now near 
at hand and here at the close of the long struggle he dis- 
played that magnanimity and nobility of character which 
had always been the crowning glory of his life, for when 
Cornwallis was so penned in that his downfall and capture 
was certain, the French Admiral proposed that he and 
Lafayette go in and finish up Cornwallis, but Lafayette 



63 

ever faithful to Washington, waited until he arrived, thus 
giving to Washington the honor and glory of the closing 
event and final victory, when he might have taken it, at 
least in a great measure, to himself. Cornwallis sur- 
rendered, and there ended one of the greatest dramas of the 
world's history, in which Lafayette was a star actor and 
one of the central figures. It was the last battle of the 
American Revolution and it was won by Lafayette's 
fighters and under his personal direction. 

Congress now felt that Lafayette's presence in France 
was more necessary to the same cause than even his ser- 
vices here, for it was not known that King George would at 
this point ask for peace, and the young Marquis went 
back to the land of his nativity to continue his labor of 
love for liberty and America. 

He continued his work in France and even was made 
Chief of Staff in another formidable expedition against the 
British power in America, but he never again was called 
upon to fight the English, for peace came to us on the third 
of September, 1783. Even after this, Lafayette continued 
his labors for our country and did what he could to bring 
the affairs of America to a successful conclusion in France. 
But the interests of his people claimed his attention, for 
the slumbering fires of revolution soon became manifest in 
France. Here we leave our hero, our friend, our Lafayette, 
to continue in France his fight for freedom and mankind, 
for it was with deep-seated love for liberty that lead him 
to take up the cause of the oppression in our struggle for 
freedom, and in the great and tragic events soon to trans- 
pire in the French Revolution. 



6 4 

The question is often asked: Was Lafayette great? 
Whatever claim he had to greatness came from long steady, 
persistent and unselfish devotion to liberty. Instead of 
the imaginary republic of Plato or the Eutopia of Sir 
Thomas More, he took for his model that government 
and those principles that gives to mankind the greatest 
happiness and the highest life. 

He seemed to have in mind as the all absorbing ambition 
of his life the liberty of America and France — the two 
nations which became the most prominent and important 
republics of the world. Events and efforts which seem 
trifling, ofttimes shape and control the destiny of nations, 
as well as men, and if the "French Alliance" was neces- 
sary to the success of our arms in our struggle for inde- 
pendence (a conclusion to which it would seem the student 
of history must come) and if Lafayette who worked 
unremittingly for that alliance, brought it to a successful 
issue, then if great results from human efforts confer 
greatness, Lafayette was indeed great, for he would then 
be the instrument by and through which we attained our 
independence. But however that may be, few men have 
as indelibly stamped their names on the pages of history. 
He possessed in the highest degree the true principles of 
altruism. Few, if any names of history are recorded 
showing such untiring devotion and generosity as he mani- 
fested in the struggle for our independence, and for the 
freedom of mankind, to which he pledged his life, his 
fortune and his sacred honor. 

ORRIN L. BOSWORTH. 



THE MEMORIAL OF THE MEN WHO DIED 
IN THE SWAMP FIGHT 



Address by Norman M Isham 
June 15, 1907 



A rock on the spot which saw the very beginnings of 
English Narragansett now bears a bronze tablet marking 
the site of the grave of the Swamp Fight Soldiers. The 
purpose of this paper is to show how we know that these 
colonial warriors do actually rest where the state, with the 
enduring metal has placed their memorial. 

The South County has kept an unbroken line of verbal 
testimony handed down from father to son about the 
Great Grave on the Updike farm. 

We have also contemporary written evidence of the 
burial, a direct statement in a letter of Captain James 
Oliver sent from Narragansett a little over a month after 
the battle. 

In regard to the return march, which was so fatal to the 

wounded, we have, again, this letter of Captain Oliver, 

and others written by the Rev. Joseph Dudley, one of the 

chaplains in the Massachusetts force. There is also a 

statement made some years later by Colonel Church, and 

a petition for relief made in 1 703 by John Bool, a Massachu- 
5 



66 

setts soldier, who, like Church, was one of the wounded 
carried that night to the garrison. 

These are the foundations of all our knowledge of the 
events we are to discuss. They are the statements of 
eyewitnesses. To them may be added Major Bradford's 
letter from the Newport hospital and the material in the 
archives of the colonies. 

Another class of evidence is that given by the historians 
of the time. It is very valuable, but though much of it 
was no doubt derived at first hand from eyewitnesses, 
it has not the same weight as the testimony of the actors, 
for we can not always tell how much of it is so derived and 
how much is not. 

Let us now see whether from all this evidence we can 
not make a picture of that dreadful night march and of the 
burial of the dead, showing by absolute proof that forty 
men were buried at Narragansett, and by a close approxi- 
mation to certainty that the grave was near the rock which 
we have marked. 

The Colonial army left the field of the Swamp Fight 
about sundown, that is to say, about after half-past four, 
on Sunday, December 19, 1675, the December 30 of our 
modern calendar. 

In what condition was the army when the trumpeters 
sounded the recall and the depleted companies were 
formed on the upland near the northern edge of the 
swamp? 

About one thousand men had gone into the action 
between one and two o'clock. Of these about 500, in 



67 

six companies and one troop, were from Massachusetts; 
about three hundred, in five companies, with 150 Mohegans 
and Pequots, from Connecticut; and about 150, in two 
companies, from Plymouth. Some Rhode Island men 
were attached to them as volunteers. The force was not 
organized as a regiment, but as what we should call a 
brigade. Each colonial quota might be called a regiment, 
but there were few regimental officers and the highest in 
command of any colony's troops was a major, who except 
in the case of Connecticut, was also captain of the leading 
company. This idea may be found in the organization of 
our Revolutionary army. 

The command-in-chief was held by Josiah Winslow, of 
Plymouth, with the rank of General. Major Robert 
Treat, leader of the Connecticut force, said to have been 
the last man to leave the fort, as John Raymond, of 
Middleboro, claimed to have been the first man in, was 
the second in command. 

The troopers, and perhaps all the officers, wore corslets. 
Whether buff coats were worn by all, it is not easy to 
say. Captain Davenport certainly had one. Rev. Mr. 
Dudley, in his letter asks for "blunderbusses, and hand 
grenadoes and armor, if it may, and at least two armourers 
to mend arms." 

Each man, except the troopers who were armed with 
short guns, possibly blunderbusses, carried a long musket 
with a flint lock, and all wore swords, though ten nun 
from each Connecticut county wore hatchets instead for 



68 

side arms. A bandoleer, like a modern cartridge belt over 
the shoulder, carried the powder for the guns in separate 
charges. The priming powder was carried in a horn. 

The Rev. Mr. Dudley, in his letter reporting the battle, 
says: "after our wounds were dressed we drew up for 
a march. " Hubbard, the historian of the war, says that 
they returned to quarters before their wounds could be 
dressed. He also says, however, that the dead and wounded 
were carried out of the fort as they fell. The care of 
the wounded, then, must have been continuous and Dudley 
must have referred to the last work done upon the newly 
injured and upon the others in getting them ready to 
move. 

There were four surgeons with the army, Dr. Daniel 
Weld of Salem, surgeon-in-chief, and the regimental 
surgeons, Richard Knott of Marblehead for Massachusetts, 
Matthew Fuller of Barnstable for Plymouth, and Rev. 
Gershom Bulkeley of Wethersfield for Connecticut. 
This gave one surgeon for every fifty-two of the injured, 
or, if we omit those killed outright, one to every forty- 
eight. This provision certainly was intended to be ample, 
but it may be doubted if it sufficed in the fierce cold and 
storm when the numbness of the surgeons' hands must have 
been a terrible hindrance, even if there were fires to keep 
them warm. 

Nor are we to suppose that the surgeons' knowledge was, 
for those days at all inadequate. For the heavy mortality 
we must blame the professional equipment and also the 



69 

professional prejudices then common to the world. The 
heaviest charge against the doctors is that made by Church 
that one of them, at least, was so anxious to get away from 
the Swamp that he would let Church bleed to death like 
a dog if he continued to advise General Winslow to occupy 
the fort. The mortality on the retreat is a terrible 
refutation of the reasons this surgeon gave for making it. 
The army left several dead in the fort — Captain Oliver 
says eight. Ninigret, according to Major Bradford's 
letter to Mr. Cotton, sent in word that his men had 
buried about twenty-four English, and that he wanted a 
charge of powder for each, which makes his count a little 
suspicious, in view of the care Oliver seems to have taken, 
especially as Joshua Tift, "Hatchet Tift" I think your 
tradition calls him, said that five or six English dead were 
found, on one of whom, curiously enough, was a pound and 
a half of powder. This does not look as if the bodies were 
abandoned because of fire. Hubbard gives some ground 
for the suggestion which has been made that these dead 
were left in the fort to deceive the Indians as to the 
English loss. None of the eyewitnesses speak of any such 
motive, and the leaving of the powder on one of the dead 
rather tells against an artifice which suggests a low esti- 
mate of Indian cunning. The strongest argument in 
favor of it is the wrath which it perhaps stirred in Connecti- 
cut some of whose men may have been left to the wild 
beasts or the mercies of Ninigret. For, in the commission 
to Major Talcott, May 26, 1676, the seventh article 



70 

reads: " Allsoe that you endeavoure to bury your slaine, 
if any be, and see your wounded well dressed by the 
chirurgions. " There were to be no more of Mosely's 
cold and snowy retreats. 

Twelve dead they took with them, says Oliver — no doubt 
the Captains Davenport, Johnson, Gardiner, Gallup and 
Marshall, with seven others, to us unknown, who must 
have been important men. Who were those left in the 
fort we do not know. As the returns of the dead in the 
Massachusetts Records mention some servants, probably 
sent out in place of their impressed masters, we might 
assume that they made up the eight. They would in any 
case be men whose unimportance in the minds of the 
Puritan aristocrats justified the leaving of them. If we 
could only assume the more charitable view that these 
men were inaccessible because of the fire among the 
wigwams we could account for Ninigret's twenty-four 
as well as for Oliver's eight, for a mistake could easily have 
been made in the confusion. All that destroys our illusion 
is the peculiarly positive statement of Oliver and the 
powder story of Joshua Tift. 

However it may have been, with twelve important dead 
and nearly two hundred wounded, some of them mortally, 
the army fell in and began the retreat. Captain Oliver 
says the dead and wounded numbered two hundred and 
ten. Consider this proportion for a moment. One 
thousand men, we will say, went into the fight. Now here 
are eight hundred ready to march away with one-fourth 



7i 

their number of dead and disabled — one dead or wounded 
man, that is, to every four able-bodied soldiers, if we are 
to call them able who had been marching and fighting 
since five o'clock in the morning with no food but what 
they could eat on the march, and upon whom a stormy 
night of almost zero weather was closing in. No wonder 
Dudley said two days later: "Our dead and wounded 
are two hundred, disabled as many. " 

Then, if these two hundred men were actually carried 
on stretchers by their half-frozen comrades it took four 
men to each helpless burden. Yet out of the eight 
hundred we must take the guard assigned to the General 
and his staff, as also the necessary "Forelorns, front guard 
and rereward " as they were called. Those one hundred and 
fifty Mohegans who possibly did much of this scouting 
and rear work, did they carry any wounded but their own? 
If we believe Captain Oliver they had been treacherous 
in the fight and had fired high, but had got great store of 
plunder, guns and kettles. They must have been well 
loaded with these on that cold night. These exceptions 
would reduce the available carrying force nearly to three 
men for every one carried. This is evidently impossible. 
Then, too, if they had several hundred prisoners, as 
Oliver, but as other contemporary, reports, who kept 
guard over those? 

Again the testimony is that it had been snowing and that 
the storm was still raging. The anonymous letter to 
London says it snowed the night before, all that Sunday, 



72 

and all the night of the retreat. The author says the snow 
was two or three feet deep. It may have been in northern 
Massachusetts, but hardly so in Narragansett. All agree 
that it was very cold. We can well believe this, for the 
swamp was frozen so that men could cross it. 

Now I do not believe that there ever lived three men, 
or even four who could carry a dead or wounded man 
seventeen miles on such a night through deep snow, 
constantly increasing, and do it on foot with a twelve 
pound gun, a knapsack, a sword or hatchet and what 
was left of the powder and bullets with which they had 
been provided. 

How then did they go? 

They returned from the Swamp as they had gone thither, 
on horseback. That is to say, it seems to me almost cer- 
tain that, aside from the troopers of the one company of 
regular horse, who from an old English idea of the superior 
gentility of such service chose to take the field as cavalry, 
the soldiers of the Swamp Fight campaign, those we have 
always looked upon as foot, were, to use the old expression, 
''mounted as dragoons," were men who fought, indeed, 
on foot, but who moved about on horseback. They were 
drilled not in cavalry tactics, but in those of the infantry; 
they used their horses not for fighting, but for locomotion; 
they were equipped not as cavalry with the long sword as 
the principal weapon, but as infantry with the long- 
barreled musket as their chief arm. 

All the Connecticut troops in the previous campaigns 
had, as the records show, been dragoons. It seems 



73 

unlikely that any change would be made in this expedition 
which had to cover such long distances. Nor is it to be 
supposed that men who about their own affairs always 
rode, and who had ridden in the Valley campaigns could 
be induced to walk from Hartford to Narragansett in 
winter, leaving their horses at home. 

In a later campaign also, Major Talcott was ordered to 
"see to the preservation" of his "army, both man and 
horse. " 

The Plymouth soldiers who came up to Rehoboth in 
pursuit of Philip after the Mount Hope campaign had 
horses. 

In Massachusetts, too, dragoons had been employed. 
Captain Henchman, early in the war was ordered to lead 
out a company mounted as dragoons. The soldiers went 
to the fight at Turner's Falls on horseback, and, it must 
be said, were glad to get away in the same manner. 
Captain Thomas Savage was sent to Mount Hope "with 
sixty horse, and as many Foot" .... "having 
prest horses for the footmen, and six carts to carry 
provisions." 

Carts can hardly be imagined at the Swamp Fight, 
though they came to Smith's Garrison — by the way, 
the Connecticut troops impressed carts at New London, 
did they leave them at Pettaquamscut or send them on 
to Smith's? — but baggage horses there were in plenty. 
We know this from the directions of the Connecticut 
Council of War, which ordered, in regard to the one 



74 

hundred and ten men to be raised in Hartford County 
that ". . . the commanders are to haue each of them a 
horss, and euery three soldiers a horss between them." 
They also commanded Major Treat, November 27, 1675, 
" to make ye best of his way by water or land" (from New 
Haven and Fairfield Counties) " to New London . . . 
and if by land, then euery commission officer to haue a 
horss to himselfe, and euery three soldiers to haue a horss 
between them." Miss Caulkins says the army came to 
New London by land. From the records it is evident 
the Hartford men did so, and Major Treat, we may 
believe, was willing to go by the same way in order to 
secure the horses which would be so useful to him later on. 
In Massachusetts the evidence for the possession of 
baggage horses is not so clear, though that the officers 
wanted them for themselves and their men is perfectly 
plain. The Captains petitioned the Council asking how 
many horses would be allowed the officers at the public 
charge. The answer was, three to each company. They 
asked how many for the men "for Cariage of Lugage and 
transporting souldiers over Rivers on occasion," and there 
is no reply at hand. As it seems to have been a question 
of public or private expense we may think that the worthy 
Council meant that men who did not want their feet wet 
should take their own horses, a way out of the difficulty 
which was possibly open to them. However, as the Massa- 
chusetts records show that horses were ordered, one hundred 
and even one hundred and fifty at a time to carry baggage 



75 

and provisions to the rendezvous in later campaigns it 
follows either that they had learned from Connecticut or 
that they regularly, and hence on this campaign also, 
allowed their men the animals at the public or at private 
expense. 

On these horses, which had been picketed on the upland 
during the fight, the men put their baggage and such of 
the wounded as could ride. Those who were more severely 
injured may have been slung each in a blanket between 
two of the animals. 

Now let us turn our backs upon the battle field and with 
the wearied soldiery address ourselves to the march. 
Daylight was almost gone. It was snowing — "not able 
to abide the field in the storm" writes Dudley — but the 
blaze of the burning wigwams must still have lit up the 
savage scene. The writer in the Old Indian Chronicle 
says they marched three miles by the light of the conflagra- 
tion ! Upon which Mr. Drake, the editor, suggests that the 
reader may need to reinforce his credulity. It does seem 
a large story, as the latest historians of the war remark, 
but I think a light other than the literal one referred 
to is cast by it upon the retreat. If it is true, it follows 
that, once out of the swamp, which may well have been 
on fire also, the country was fairly open — that the South 
County was not heavily timbered throughout as we are 
apt to imagine all New England was in the earliest days. 
There were numerous Indian clearings and much of the 
land was empty. In fact, as good Governor Winthrop 



7 6 

described it, the Narragansett country was "all champain 
for many miles. " 

A popular belief has been that the settlers did not know 
where they were, and that they wandered "across lots" 
in the woods which in the ordinary view, covered the whole 
distance traversed, stumbling over the snow-covered tree 
trunks, crashing through underbrush, falling with their 
wounded burdens and losing their way. Some of this is 
true, and is founded on their own statements. Part of 
it, however, is erroneous. The country was partly open 
and was crossed in many directions by trails as well 
defined as any footpath of to-day. The expedition was 
not a hit or miss affair. It was too costly for that, though 
the fact might not have prevented the blunders our 
ancestors were prone to make in their Indian campaigns. 
The leaders, however, even if the general, who was not 
much regarded, I am afraid, did get lost, knew where they 
were. They had for some time known of the stronghold 
in the swamp. They had the Indian, Peter, who led them 
thither and who probably led them back again. It is 
true their historians acknowledge that he saved their 
army, and little beside this acknowledgment did he 
receive for the service, but it is idle to speak as if the army 
could get absolutely lost in the Narragansett with one 
hundred and fifty Mohegans among them! The main 
difficulties, it seems from the events, were to keep the trail 
in the snow and to hold the white men together. The 
first the Indians of any tribe were perfectly competent 
to do. The second proved the harder problem. 



77 

What was the line of the retreat? There is a tradition 
that it lay over McSparran Hill, and this I believe to be 
the fact. I think it was then the easiest line to follow. 
That is, they left the Swamp by the way they had entered 
it and kept along what is now the road running by Mr. 
Clarke's across the present railroad track below the station, 
thence over Kingston Hill, through Mooresfield and so to 
the Pequot Path, which must have been even then a cart 
road. 

This line of march followed an Indian trail swinging 
from the Post Road or Pequot Path around the Swamp 
and running south through Shannock to the Path again 
near the present Cross's Mills or turning off toward 
Westerly on the line of a fragment of a road shown on 
Caleb Harris's map of 1795. 

All over Rhode Island the roads follow the old trails. 
The Pequot Path or Post Road itself is the best known 
instance of this, and it was especially true of Narragansett 
where, as Roger Williams says, "may be a dozen" Indian 
towns could be found "in twenty miles travel. " 

Again, Hall and Knight's purchase, in which the Swamp 
Fort lay was on the line of this ancient trail, which was 
the means of access to it then as the later road was to the 
homesteads, pastures or wood lots it afterwards contained. 
In fact, I believe the trail made possible the purchase. 
Several ancient houses also, a sure sign of an old road, 
stand or stood along the line of this path. 

If this was a trail in 1675 l[ early became a cart road. 
Joseph Davel, a surveyor, testified in 17 11 that in 1693 



78 

he laid out highways for Hall and Knight through their 
purchase, and in 1699 the Assembly, in fixing the western 
line of Kingstown, followed the Usquepaug river to the 
cart bridge at Mr. Cottrell's. A glance at the map 
with the bearings and distances in mind will show that the 
bridge was on this road. 

All the army, however, did not return by the same way. 
"The General, Ministers, and some other persons of the 
guard, going to hold a small swamp, lost our way and 
returned again to the evening's quarters," says Dudley, 
himself presumably one of the ministers. This can only 
mean that they reached Pettaquamscut where they had 
camped the night before. Oliver has a similar story, 
and Increase Mather says "a part of the army missed their 
way, among whom was the General with his life guard." 
This party after "wandering up and down" and travelling 
near thirty miles reached Smith's at seven o'clock the next 
morning. The main body had arrived five hours earlier. 
It looks as if the General did not have in his party Peter, 
the Indian guide who was "captivated" originally by 
Mosely the Massachusetts officer, not on the march to the 
fort as is often said, but several days earlier, and who was 
promised his own freedom and that of his wife in con- 
sideration of his services. Yet, ten years after the battle 
his wife was still in bondage to Mosely, while his daughter 
though to be a slave for four years only was still wrongfully 
held. 

When the column reached Cocumscussuc its first duty 
must have been to care for its wounded. All that could 



79 

be placed in the block house were there collected, and the 
writer in the Indian Chronicle says that General Winslow, 
in order that the house might be thus occupied, lay in a 
barn belonging to the estate. Other houses were used, 
which must have been those on the Pequot Path to the 
north and at Quidnesset. But even this accommodation 
was bad enough. John Bool, who speaks from experience, 
says in a petition to the Governor and Court of Massachu- 
setts: "aftor I was wounded I was carried some twenty 
miles in a very cold night and laid in A cold chamber, a 
wooden pillo my covering was ye snow the wind droue on 
me a sad time to war in to be wounded tho in a lettle 
time I was moued to Rodisland. " Some of the uninjured 
Connecticut soldiers were quartered in what Deputy 
Governor Leete called " a house without walls. " 

Only twenty men had been killed outright in the action. 
Twenty-two died on that march. These, with the twelve 
dead brought from the Swamp, were buried on December 
twentieth in what we call the Great Grave. "Many died 
by the way, " says Oliver," and as soon as they were brought 
in, so that December 20th, we buried in a grave 34, next 
day 4, next day 2, and none since here." He was writing 
on the twenty-sixth of January, our February sixth, 1675. 

Those were days of snow and continued cold. The 
storm of the retreat seems to have continued next day 
and to have been a heavy one. There was no thaw for 
some weeks. Winter had set in early that year and we 
may believe the ground was frozen. Hence the labor 



8o 

of digging the grave, which must have covered a consider- 
able area, would be heavy and the grave on that account 
may have been shallow. A confirmation of these con- 
jectures is at hand in the fact that Mr. Edwin Halsey 
Reynolds, in digging on the ancient site some thirty years 
ago, could find no remains. A shallow grave allows the 
chemistry of nature to dispose of its contents in a short 
time. No metal articles appeared for the bodies were 
propably interred in thin clothing. Mr. C. B. Reynolds, 
who, as a young man, was present at the excavation, 
speaks of finding a stratum of black material in the trench. 
The only mark of the grave, up to the present time, 
except the bowlder at the South of it, upon which we have 
placed our tablet, was the so-called "Grave Apple Tree" 
blown down in the gale of 1815. Some letters are said 
to have been cut on a near-by rock in 1879, but a search 
to-day does not reveal them. The chief memory of this 
honorable resting place has been handed down in the Updike 
family, descendants of Richard Smith whose land this was, 
who have held the estate in unbroken tenure till the early 
years of the nineteenth century. The tradition among 
them is authentic, as it seems to the committee, beyond 
all doubt. The spoken word that identifies this spot 
can be traced from people now living to the years before the 
Revolution, when old inhabitants, whose fathers had seen 
the actors in the tragic drama, were still alive. Wilkins 
Updike, and his brothers and sisters, heard the story from 
their father, Lodowick Updike, born in 1725, who remem- 



bered his grandfather also, Lodowick, nephew of Richard 
Smith the younger, and this Lodowick, dying in 1737, 
must himself have helped to bury his brother Richard in 
this grave. 

It seems strange, however, that no mark was made on 
the spot and that the whole matter was left to tradition, 
that our ancestors were so indifferent to the actual resting 
place of these honored dead. Nothing has ever been said 
over them. The volleys of the squad drawn up at the 
grave-side for the final salute were probably the only 
ceremony. The prayer we have made this afternoon is 
no doubt the first that the grave has ever known. Even 
Samuel Sewall so hated the idea of a burial sendee at a 
grave that he once went away from the house of a friend 
without following the body to the churchyard. 

Who were the forty slain? We shall never know with 
certainty. None can tell us who were left in the fort, 
and the dead of Plymouth and Connecticut are very 
imperfectly recorded. Eight or nine for Plymouth and 
about forty for Connecticut are the numbers handed down, 
but the names we know in a few cases only. 

The five captains, there can be little doubt, rest there, 
Davenport, Johnson, Gardiner, Gallup and Marshall, 
and probably Seely also, who is said to have been shot by 
Joshua Tift, and who died of his wound in a few days. 
Corporal John Edwards of Wethersfield and Ebenezer 
Dibble of Windsor are there and some others have been 
named, but we do not know whether they died at Narra- 



82 

gansett or on Rhode Island. Dr. Bodge gives the names 
of the thirty-one Massachusetts dead, but it seems 
impossible they should all be here, or else the share of 
Plymouth and Connecticut in the grave is very small. 
And yet on Connecticut, says Trumbull, fell half the loss 
in the battle. 

Of our own men, the volunteers from this colony, we 
know only two, Richard Updike, of Narragansett, brother 
of Lodowick and grandson of the elder Smith, who served 
in Captain Mosely's company, and Nicholas Power, of 
Providence, son of the original settler, who, like Captain 
Gardiner, was killed in the smoke and confusion by his 
own comrades who were behind him. 

If the historians have said too little of the dead, these did 
not for all that lack their eulogist. The General Court of 
Connecticut at some time after the battle gave an account 
of what they call "that signal service the fort fight in 
Narragansett." Let me use their words. "There died 
many brave officers and sentinels, whose memory is blessed 
and whose death redeemed our lives. The bitter cold, 
the tarled swamp, the tedious march, the strong fort, the 
numerous and stubborn enemy they contended with, for 
their God, king and country, be their trophies over death. 
. . . Our mourners over all the colony witness for 
our men that they were not unfaithful in that day. " 

That was their view of the fight — for God and the 
country. We may have our misgivings, but it is not ours 
to judge. We right too slowly the wrongs of our own day. 



83 

It is ours to be as firm for God and country with our better 
light as they with their imperfect view; to be as steadfast, 
as self -controlled, as brave in our bloodless battle with the 
powers of evil in our day as the men who fell on the crimson 
snow of that far-off December. 

NORMAN MORRISON ISHAM. 



THE MICHAEL PIERCE FIGHT 



By Edwin C. Pierce 
September 21, 1907 



This is historic ground. It is the scene of one of the 
most tragic and most heroic events in early New England 
history. Here, in 1676, just a hundred years before the 
Declaration of American Independence, with a valor as 
distinguished as that of the Greek heroes at old Ther- 
mopylae, although unvictorious, our ancestors, undaunted, 
fronted inevitable defeat and certain death in hand-to- 
hand conflict with an outnumbering savage foe. Here 
they died upon the Bed of Honor. 

Here we, their descendants, come, two hundred and 
thirty-one years after the day of blood and battle on which 
they painfully laid down their lives for their countrymen 
and for posterity, to celebrate their brave sacrifice, to erect 
here a memorial of their heroic devotion, and to consider 
and, if we may, profitably interpret the lessons to be drawn 
from the history of that tragic event and that serious and 
strenuous time. 

Let us first review the facts that happened here, the 
actualities of the tragedy, the fortitude and desperate 
valor, unsurpassed in the annals of warfare, here displayed; 




I'ii r< i 's Figh i . Centra] I \i i - 



85 

and then consider somewhat the war in which Pierce's 
fight was a bloody day, the merits of the war, the cause for 
which they died. 

The day of Pierce's fight was Sunday, March 26th, 1676. 
It was in the midst of Philip 's war. That war, the bloody 
and decisive struggle between the English colonists and 
the Indians, has been raging for nearly a year. The 
Narragansetts, that proud and powerful tribe with whom 
Roger Williams and the Rhode Island and Providence 
colonists had long maintained unbroken peace and friend- 
ship, had at last been drawn into hostilities towards the 
colonists. In December, 1675, the Narragansetts had 
been attacked in their strong fort in South Kingstown, 
defeated, slaughtered by hundreds, and their power 
forever broken. With the courage of despair, the still 
formidable remnant of the Narragansett warriors took the 
warpath early in the spring of 1676, under their brave 
chief, who knew not fear, Nanunteenoo, better known as 
Canonchet, son of the famous Miantonomi. 

The Narragansetts, while renewing, and with sincerity 
so far as may be judged, to Roger Williams pledges of 
immunity for him did not withhold their vengance from 
settlers in Rhode Island. Parties of warriors penetrated 
into Plymouth Colony, ravaging and killing. Dwelling 
in continual alarm, the Plymouth Colony was aroused 
to action for the defense of the homes and the lives of 
its people. This defense could only be effectually made, 
the bloody invasion of the Plymouth country could only 



86 

be repelled, by waging offensive war against the Narra- 
gansetts, by pursuing the marauding bands and attacking 
them wherever they might be found in their forest 
fastnesses. 

The duty of leading in the pursuit and the attack of the 
Narragansetts was assigned to Captain Michael Pierce, of 
Scituate. At the outbreak of Philip 's war, Michael Pierce 
was about sixty years of age, having been born in England 
about the year 1615. He came to the Plymouth Colony 
about the year 1645, an d settled almost immediately in 
Scituate, where he ever after resided. He appears to have 
been a brother of that John Pierce, of London, who secured 
a patent, or royal grant, for New England, before the 
Pilgrims landed at Plymouth, which patent he assigned to 
the Plymouth Company after their settlement had been 
effected. He was also, according to the early historians 
of New England, a brother of that Captain William Pierce 
who was the most famous master of ships that came to the 
New England coast; the warm friend of Winslow and 
Bradford, who commanded the Mayflower in New England 
waters, although not on her first famous voyage, the 
"Charity" when she brought Winslow and the first 
cattle, the "Lion" when she arrived with provisions in the 
crisis of the famine, Roger Williams being his passenger 
upon that memorable occasion, and who while righting the 
Spaniards in the West Indies was mortally wounded and 
found his grave in the ocean, on which he had made his 
long and honorable career. Michael Pierce was with the 



87 

Plymouth forces in the bloody Narragansett fight in South 
Kingstown in December, 1675. Earlier in that year he 
made his will which is of record in the Plymouth Colony 
records, the preamble of which is : 

"I, Michael Pierce of Scituate, in the government of 
New Plymouth in America, being now by the appoint- 
ment of God, going out to war against the Indians doe 
make this my last will and testament." 

Acting under orders from the Plymouth Colony, Cap- 
tain Pierce with a company comprising about fifty English- 
men and twenty friendly Cape Indians, started in pursuit 
of the marauding Narragansetts. The Plymouth band 
proceeded without encounter with the foe as far as the 
Rehoboth settlement which was on the extreme western 
boundary of the Plymouth Colony, separated from the 
Providence Colony by the Seekonk. 
The men of Rehoboth were living in constant expectation 
of attack from the hostile Indians, and the arrival of Cap- 
tain Pierce's company must have been most welcome. 

Making his temporary headquarters at Rehoboth, 
Captain Pierce on Saturday, the 25th of March, sallied 
forth with a small party of his men in search of the hostiles. 
Discovering the Narragansetts in considerable force the 
colonists attacked and, without loss to themselves, inllicted 
considerable losses upon the enemy. 

The colonial captain had received intelligence that a 
party of the enemy lay near Blackstone's house at 
Study Hill, in Cumberland, and appears not to have been 



88 

daunted by the apprehension reasonable to have been 
entertained that Canonchet with all the warriors of the 
Narragansett nation might be close at hand, preparing an 
ambuscade. The Plymouth captain, however, did not 
omit to summon all the force upon which he could call. 
Before leaving Rehoboth to march to the attack, he 
despatched a messenger to Captain Andrew Edmunds, of 
Providence, with a letter asking Edmunds to meet him 
at a spot above Pawtucket, on the river, and assist him in 
the enterprise. The messenger reached Providence on 
Sunday morning, but either there was delay in the delivery 
of the letter or the Providence men were not willing to 
leave Providence undefended. At any rate no reinforce- 
ment from Providence reached the Plymouth colonials. 

As the ambuscade was near Quinsniket, there can be no 
doubt that Canonchet with perhaps seven hundred war- 
riors of the brave and now utterly desperate Narragansett 
nation had made this rocky fastness his base of operations. 
There, under the overhanging rock of the hill- top the 
savage chieftain held his council fire and the plan for the 
ambuscade was laid. The sortie of the colonials from 
Rehoboth on Saturday must have been reported to 
Canonchet, and he must have judged that encouraged by 
their success, the English would continue their advance, 
and accordingly he prepared to ambush, overwhelm and 
annihilate them. 

Early on Sunday morning the colonials marched from 
Rehoboth. Their number, recruited at Rehoboth, 



8 9 

amounted to a few over sixty English and about twenty- 
friendly Wampanoags from the Cape. They doubtless 
proceeded across the Seekonk plains and skirted the east 
bank of the Blackstone until they reached a point on the 
river above Pawtucket Falls where the river was fordable, 
the territory at that point being then called the Attle- 
borough Gore. The territory on the west bank of the 
river is now in Central Falls. There can be no doubt as 
to the spot because at no other place on the river could a 
large body of men approach a ford. At this point the ford 
was approached through a ravine having a wide level 
ground on either side of which rose a wood crowned hill. 
The hills have long since been leveled. The plan of Canon- 
chet was to draw the colonials into this defile and then 
attack them from the hills and to cut off the retreat by 
quickly throwing a strong force in their rear. As a decoy 
a few Indians showed themselves rambling in a wood. 
They fled at the approach of the colonials, limping as they 
ran. The colonials supposed them to have been wounded 
in the fight of Saturday and gave chase. 

Captain Pierce led his company into the ravine and 
approached the river, probably following the advance 
party of his men which had crossed in safety. Suddenly 
the silence was rent with savage cries, and springing from 
their concealment on the commanding hills, the Narra- 
gansetts directed their deadly and painfully wounding 
arrows upon the colonials who were thus entrapped. 
Canonchet with all his warriors was upon them. The 



9 o 

highest estimate of the number of the Narragansetts that 
attacked Captain Pierce's little force is about a thousand. 
Other narratives estimate six or seven hundred. If there 
were six hundred, the colonials must have realized that 
their doom was sealed, except indeed for the hope that 
Captain Edmunds would shortly arrive with his Provi- 
dence company. Instantly the colonial captain realized 
that his only chance lay in getting out of the defile by 
crossing the river. On the west bank there was an open, 
or at least not heavily wooded, plain, in which his men 
would be out of arrow shot from the hills and where they 
could at least make a better defense than was possible in 
the ravine. Then, to, they would be on the side on which 
Captain Edmunds might be marching to their aid. It 
seems probable that in order to make the decoy successful, 
the warriors on the west side lay in ambush a good distance 
from the river, so that the colonials were able to cross the 
river, probably not without loss and gain the open space 
where they proposed to make their stand. 

While the enemy was swarming down the ravine and 
across the river in hot pursuit, a band of at least three 
hundred Narragansetts rushed upon the colonials from 
their concealment on the west side, so that the colonials 
were now completely surrounded. Captain Pierce now 
threw his men into a circle placing his men in ranks, back 
to back, and facing the foe they thus fought to the death. 

No banners waived, no martial music stimulated their 
ardor, no sounds except the reverberations of musketry 



9i 

and the terrifying yells of the infuriated warriors who 
encompassed them about. The colonials were indeed 
better supplied with firearms than the enemy, but they 
were of the ancient, slow firing sort, while the arrows of the 
foe were directed against them from behind trees and rocks 
with unerring aim, and tomahawks hurled through the 
air by the powerful savage were felling them to the ground. 
Resolved to sell their lives at as dear a rate as possible, 
the colonials stood their ground with ever thinning ranks, 
for about two hours, keeping themselves in order and the 
enemy at a little distance. 

The formation of the order of battle is related by a 
chronicle of the time in these words : 

"Captain Pierce cast his sixty-three English and twenty 
Indians into a ring, and six fought back to back, and were 
double, double distance all in one ring, whilst the Indians 
were as thick as they could stand thirty deep." 

The effectiveness of the defense appears by the great 
loss suffered by the Narragansetts. Some of them taken 
prisoners a few days later confessed that one hundred and 
forty were killed before their victory was won. Drake's 
Indian Chronicle estimates the loss of the Narragansetts 
at above three hundred, but this is probably an ex- 
aggeration. 

At last when, as the tradition is, scarcely twenty of the 
colonials maintain their footing, they give over futile resist- 
ance and break and run, each man for himself. Nine of 
them are seized and made captive. One of the friendly 



02 

Indians, Amos, fought until the colonials had ceased to 
fight and then by blacking his face with powder, as he saw 
the Narragansetts had done, mingled with them and 
escaped. A few others of Captain Pierce's Indians and 
fewer still of the Englishmen, perhaps three or four, by 
artifice and good fortune, managed to escape. 

The Narrgansetts proceeded with their prisoners to the 
spot in Cumberland now called "Nine Men's Misery." 
There, according to tradition, the captives were seated upon 
a rock, a fire lighted, and the war dance preparatory to the 
torture was begun. The chronicles say that, differing 
among themselves as to the mode of torture, the Indians 
dispatched their prisoners with the tomahawk. But, of 
what happended at Nine Men's Misery there is no real 
evidence. The bodies of the prisoners were found and 
buried by the English a little later, and a monumental 
pile of stones was erected in honor of the brave and 
unfortunate men. 

We may imagine the wild and vengeful joy with which 
the warriors of Cononchet celebrated their victory in their 
fastness at Quinsniket. Encouraged by their success, the 
very next day after the fight the Narragansetts descended 
upon Rehoboth and burned forty houses, and before the 
end of March, Providence was attacked and fifty-four 
buildings burned. 

Arnold 's history narrates as follows : 
"Two places in the town had been fortified mainly 
through the efforts of Roger Williams, who, although 



93 



seventy-seven years of age, accepted the commission of 
Captain. A tradition is preserved, that when the enemy 
approached the town the venerable captain went out 
alone to meet and remonstrate with them. 'Massachu- 
setts,' said he, " can raise thousands of men at this moment, 
and if you kill them, the King of England will supply their 
places as fast as they fall.' 'Well, let them come,' was the 
reply, "we are ready for them. But as for you, brother 
Williams, you are a good man; you have been king to us 
many years; not a hair of your head shall be touched.' 
The savages were true to their ancient friend. He was not 
harmed, but the town was nearly destroyed." 

The capture of Canonchet soon followed, on the 4th of 
April. He was executed. 

Philip's war was the first conflict with the Indians in 
Massachusetts and Rhode Island. 

From his coming to Providence, Roger Williams for 
nearly forty years had lived in friendship with the Narra- 
gansetts. Canonicus and Miantonomi were his friends 
and the friends of the Providence colonists, and Canonchet 
took up the tradition of peace and amity. The wicked 
murder of Miantonomi by the procurement of Massachu- 
setts rankled in the breasts of the Narragansetts, and 
young men of the nation sympathized with Philip when he 
attempted the confederacy of the tribes. But Canonchet 
remained faithful to his friendship with Roger Williams 
and the Narragansetts did not go upon the war path as a 
tribe, although a few of the young men probably joined 
Philip's marauding bands. 



94 

Rhode Island was not a member of the confederacy of 
New England colonies, her people condemned the murder 
of Miantonomi, the Quakers were in control in her govern- 
ment, she disapproved of many acts by which the other 
colonies had provoked the war, she remained officially 
neutral. Some of her people, however, aided the other 
colonies with provisions and volunteers. Events conspired 
to bring the war home to Rhode Island. Philip 's Indians, 
defeated at Springfield, sought refuge in the Narragansett 
country, and were hospitably received. The Massachu- 
setts English demanded of Canonchet the surrender of 
Philip's Indians, who had placed their women and 
children under the protection of the Narragansett Indians. 
"Not a Wampanoag, nor the paring of a Wampanoag's 
nail, shall be delivered up," was the proud answer of the 
son of Miantonomi. The united colonies now sent an 
army of over eleven hundred men to attack the Narra- 
gansetts. 

The invasion of the Narragansett country was made 
without consulting the government of Rhode Island, which 
was a violation of the royal charter. But the people of 
Rhode Island, as well as the Narragansetts themselves, 
were divided in their counsels and volunteers joined the 
army of invasion as it marched through Providence and 
Warwick. 

On a Sunday morning in December, 1675, the Narra- 
gansett fort was attacked. The greatest battle in New 
England colonial history ensued. It was a terrible and a 



95 

bloody conflict, and for hours the issue was uncertain. 
Against the entreaty of the valiant and humane Captain 
Church, the greatest of the Indian fighters of New 
England, the wigwams within the fort were set on fire. 
Five hundred wigwams were burned, sick, wounded, infant 
and aged perishing in the flames. Six hundred Indians lost 
their lives, half of them in the fight and half in the flames. 
The English loss was heavy, although less than that of the 
Narragansetts. A majority of the superior officers fell in 
the fight. Michael Pierce was in the fight, but escaped 
with his life only to fall in the March following. 

Nothing now remained for the Narragansetts except to 
go upon the war path. In the spring they inflicted veng- 
ance far and wide. The remnant of the once proud nation 
must have known that it was now for them a death 
struggle, that the expulsion of the English was a vain 
endeavor. 

Mutual misunderstanding and distrust was perhaps 
inevitable between the Indians and the early colonists of 
New England. Still the long period of peace, and mutual 
services, is to be remembered; the well cemented friend- 
ship of the most powerful of all the Indian tribes, the 
Narragansetts, to the Rhode Island settlers, is to be 
considered. 

I am inclined to the opinion that Philip's war might 
have been avoided by the practice of the precepts of 
Christ by his professed followers, and that if the treat- 
ment of the Indians had more generally been as just 



9 6 

and considerate as that practiced by Roger Williams and 
his associates, the white man and the red man migh have 
dwelt together in peace. There really was room enough 
for both. The Indians were not nomads, they were 
willing to live by agriculture and to progress in civilization. 

However the responsibility for Philip's war may be 
awarded, or divided, the fact remains that Michael Pierce 
and his brave companions from the Plymouth towns fought 
the fight and died the death as heroes. They were sent 
here as soldiers to drive back a vengeful and dreaded foe. 
They died in honorable combat with their faces to the 
enemy, and history has no record of a bravery in war 
more splendid than was here displayed by these New 
England ancestors of ours. They were not personally 
responsible for the war, nor for any of its cruelty and 
massacre. 

Some of them, at least, like the men of Scituate, came 
from towns whose inhabitants were distinguished in that 
stern Puritan age by gentle manners and liberal views. 
The chivalric captain of Plymouth, the sword and buckler 
of the colony, was by his character and his career worthy of 
the monument that stands on Captain's Hill looking 
towards Provincetown, but surely if Standish, dying in his 
bed, is thus deserving, his successor sent out by Plymouth 
in her defense and his brave comrades, who faced certain 
death and suffered it after the manner of the old classic 
heroes, should also be thus honored. 

There is a just pride and an inspiring incentive in ances- 
try of heroic deeds and noble lives, but the lesson for us 



97 

the descendants of the brave men who here performed the 
stern duty imposed upon them is not that valor and fidelity 
on the field of battle give higher title to honorable dis- 
tinction than service to society in the ways of peace. The 
victories of peace should have even greater renown than 
those of war. The fearless and virile qualities may be 
developed amidst the trials, temptations, sacrifices and 
conflicts which in our luxurious age await those who obey 
the call of duty. Our conflicts are not with the untutored 
red men of the forest, they are with the more puissant 
forces of corruption and greed. They are also forced upon 
us, the battle field is not of our choosing, the courage 
demanded is both moral and physical, there is no retreat, 
and surrender is moral death. Duty done on such battle- 
fields is of the same quality and worth as that done amidst 
scenes of blood and carnage. Most of those who do it 
best may find scant regard while living and no recognition 
from posterity; but 

"The longer on this earth we live 

And weight the various qualities of men . . . 

The more we feel the high stern-featured beauty 

Of plain devotedness to duty. 

Steadfast and still, nor paid with mortal praise, 

But finding amplest recompense, 

For life's ungarlanded expense 

In work done squarely and unwasted days." 

EDWIN C. PIERCE 



THE EXERCISES AT MASSASOIT'S SPRING, 
WARREN, OCTOBER 1% 1907 



The dedicatory exercises oi the Massasoit Memorial, 
according to the program, commenced at the appointed 

time with an address by Professor Wilfred H. Munro, 
as follows: 

Acting for the Stale of Rhode Island, 1 have the honor, 
as Chairman of the Executive Committee oi the Rhode 

Island Historical Society, oi transferring to the custody 

oi the Massasoit Monument Association this tablet. 
Plaeed beside the gushing water known for many gener- 
ations as Massasoit 's Spring, it eommemorates the great 
Indian Saehem whose name it bears. May its presence 
Steadily incite to a more intelligent patriotism! May the 
people oi Warren, ever mindful of the prominent part 
their ancestors played in the early history of this nation, 

strive always to prove themselves worthy sons oi 
those conscientious and valiant sires! ... I have 
the pleasure of calling upon two of the descendants 

oi Massasoit to unveil the tablet . . . and 1 now 
plaee it in charge of Colonel Abbot, the President of the 

Association, 



99 



THIS TABLET 
PLACED BESIDE THE GUSHING WATER 
KNOWN FOR MANY GENERATIONS AS 

massasoit's SPRING 

COMMEMORATES THE GREAT 

INDIAN SACHEM MASSASOIT 

" FRIEND OF THE WHITE MAN " 

RULER OF THIS REGION WHEN THE 

PILGRIMS OF THE MAYFLOWER 

LANDED AT PLYMOUTH 

IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD 1620 

The tablet having been unveiled the President of the 
Association thus responded; " Mr. Chairman, and members 
of the Committee for Marking Historical Sites : In behalf 
of the Massasoit Monument Association, and I believe 
I am justified in saying, all the citizens of Warren, I 
thank you most sincerely for this tablet of enduring 
bronze in honor of him, who was ruler of this region in 
1620 when the white man came to it, and what is of 
vastly more importance, who became the friend of that 
white man. In accepting this tablet I am moved more 
deeply than I can express, because standing beside it, as 
our honored guests, are two in whose veins flows the blood 
of him for whom this memorial has been erected. Two 
hundred and eighty-six years ago men of our race came to 
this spot, and Massasoit welcomed them. We feel it to 
be a great honor that you, Charlotte and Alonzo Mitchell, 



IOO 

are here to-day, and to no other hands than yours would 
we have entrusted the sacred duty of unveiling this 
tablet. 

EXERCISES IN THE TOWN HALL. 

The committee and guests then adjourned to the town 
hall where at three o'clock the exercises were continued 
according to the Program. After the rendering of Eich- 
berg's most inspiring hymn, "To thee, O Country, the 
President spoke as follows : 

In 1620 this place was the capital of a nation, and he in 
whose honor we have gathered was the ruler. He was 
a native American, and it would have been more to our 
credit if we had not allowed nearly two hundred and fifty 
years to elapse, since his death, before erecting a memorial 
to him. To whom the credit for the idea should be given 
no one can tell. That Norman G. Burr, a former towns- 
man, was the first to contribute for the purpose is a matter 
of record. Zachariah Allen, then president of the Rhode 
Island Historical Society, was the second donor, and the 
two sums lying by for many years in our savings institu- 
tion formed a substantial nucleus for further funds. The 
Thalia Club, a local dramatic society, largely through the 
influence of our present secretary, Eugene A. Vaughan, 
gave an unique and pleasing entertainment on February 
8, 1893, for the benefit of the monument fund. Governor 
D. Russell Brown evinced great interest, and delivered 
an address. Our distinguished and lamented townsman, 



IOI 

Hezekiah Butterworth, to whose heart the idea of a memo- 
rial was very dear, spoke of Massasoit of Sowams in 
Pokanoket. The poem of George Henry Coomer to 
be read this afternoon, was on the program, as also one 
from the pen of Frederick Denison. Pleasing musical 
numbers by local talent were interspersed, and the occa- 
sion was a great success in every way, adding a consider- 
able sum to the fund. Other contributions followed, and 
the plan gained a substantial financial footing, but it 
seemed difficult to secure an unanimity of opinion on a 
site, and the interest gradually waned, not to be revived 
until last fall, when at the request of a few of the surviving 
members of the Association, the chairman and secretary 
of the State Committee for Marking Historical Sites, 
representing the entire body, visited the site of the Spring, 
and as a result a bronze tablet to be placed on a suitable 
memorial at that place was promised. Meetings of the 
Association were held, the membership increased from 
about twenty to over a hundred, a constitution adopted, 
new officers elected, and an executive committee chosen to 
conduct affairs. In the meantime Abby A. Cole, a lineal 
descendant of Sergeant Hugh Cole, who was the friend of 
Metacomet, Massasoit's younger son and ultimate suc- 
cessor, offered a boulder from the land formerly her 
ancestor's and the appropriateness of this gift was a direct 
appeal for action. The practical skill of Cornelius Harring- 
ton was necessary for the successful moving of the eight- 
ton conglomerate from its ancient to its modern bed. 



102 

The artistic taste of John DeWolf from our neighbor town 
on the Mount Hope lands was invoked, and the greater 
part of August spent in erecting the memorial. The town 
did its share by authorizing the improvement of the street, 
and the energy of our highway commissioner, James A- 
Seymour, has borne fruit therein. The Association has 
now been incorporated in order that it may legally hold 
property, and has admitted to membership fifteen of the 
wives and other female relatives of the male members, 
realizing full well the interest which women have in all 
such matters, and that their enthusiasm is a most potent 
factor for success. The interest of the owner of the property 
about the memorial, Frank W. Smith, has been of great 
assistance and has culminated in a most generous gift to 
the Association of the spring site, to have and to hold 
forever. It is my prhilege and pleasure in behalf of 
the Association to tender its sincere thanks to all who have 
assisted in any way, by contribution of money, or work 
of head or hand to the successful accomplishment of the 
memorial, and the dedication thereof, to the first citizen 
of this town of whom there is any record, the great Indian 
Sachem, Massasoit. And especially do we greet and render 
thanks to you, Alonzo and Charlotte Mitchell, for return- 
ing to the home of your fathers to honor us with your 
presence. 

But the Association does not stop its work here. Its 
by-laws provide that it shall promote any enterprise, the 
design of which is the improvement of physical and 



103 

esthetic conditions in the community. It has made a 
beginning of such work by the decoration of the surround- 
ings of the railroad station, accomplished through the 
generosity of one of its members. It does not mean to 
interfere with the duty of the town council, or encroach 
upon the prerogatives of the Business Men's Association, 
or any other body. It has neither political nor sectarian 
affiliations. It is made up of representative citizens of this 
town who in accepting membership have signified their 
interest in something which stands for an uplifting above 
the ordinary conditions of fife. A public park where leisure 
hours may be happily spent; the planting of trees to replace 
those which formerly arched our streets from end to end; 
a monument to the patriots who have borne arms in all 
the wars of our beloved country are some of the things 
which the Association hopes to accomplish in the future. 

What more potent inspiration for all good works could 
we have than the words of our revered poet-historian, 
whose cup of happiness would, we believe, be full to over- 
flowing could he have been spared to be with us to-day: 

"Warren! where first beside the cradled Nation 

The old chief stood, we love thy storied past. 
Sowams is pleasant for a habitation — 
'Twas thy first history— may it be thy last." 

The " Indian March" was spiritedly played, after which 
the President introduced Professor Munro in the follow- 
ing terms: As far back as 1S80 the historian of our 



104 

neighbor town to the south was sufficiently impressed 
by the value of tradition to give public expression to his 
belief that the spot which we honor to-day was Massasoit's 
Spring. I feel that it does not detract from the honor 
due to all the members of the Committee for Marking 
Historical Sites to say that to the chairman more than any 
other, are we indebted for the tablet beside the gushing 
water. It is therefore with profound feelings of gratitude 
that I introduce Professor Wilfred Harold Munro. 

Professor Munro spoke, informally, in part as follows : 
Under primitive conditions of life the three principal 
necessities for existence are water, food and shelter. This 
is true whether we live in solitude or in communities. The 
first necessity for a settled abode would seem to be a never 
failing supply of water. Food can be obtained in many 
places: water that is not contaminated must always 
be sought at its source. In the earliest days of Monasti- 
cism in Egypt a spring, a palm tree and a cave were 
regarded as the necessary "plant" for those who wished 
to lead a life of solitude and of contemplation. Water 
was the first requisite, then came the date-palm with its 
food, the cave in that perfect climate was sought for only 
as a shelter from the wild beasts. By the end of the 
fourth century the region known as the Thebaid was filled 
with men living in this primitive way. These monks 
had reverted to the simple life of the savage. The natives 
our ancestors encountered when they landed upon the 
continent had never passed beyond that simple life. 



i©5 

They sought for living springs as prerequisites for their 
temporary habitations. But there were no trees or shrubs 
to afford them food throughout the year and the wild 
animals were too insignificant and too few in number to 
furnish a food supply. In this region therefore they 
pitched their rude wigwams near the shore where they 
could without much difficulty secure fish, wild fowl, 
clams and oysters. The waters of Narragansett Bay were 
then more plentifully stocked with fish than now. Ducks, 
geese and other wild fowl must also have been much more 
abundant. The Indian shot both fish and fowl. 

Near the spring we have marked to-day was unques- 
tionably an Indian village in the year of our Lord, 1620. 
As a historical student I wish we might always have as 
reasonable grounds for connecting names with physical 
features as we have in this case. If ever a fact was 
firmly established by tradition the fact of Massasoit's 
connection with this spring is. Jedediah Morse, "Father 
of American Geography," caught the story from the lips 
of the children of those who had lived in the days of 
Massasoit and transferred it to his American Gazetteer 
in 1805. For more than a hundred years the tradition 
has been perpetuated upon the printed page. It is 
seldom that a story can be so easily substantiated. Not 
far away, at Mount Hope, in Bristol, is a shallow well 
which has been known ever since the founding of the town 
in 1680 as " King Philip's Spring. " You would be amazed 
to learn how infrequent in manuscripts and books is the 



io6 

mention of this famous spring. I can find hardly a refer- 
ence that is more than seventy-five years old, none as 
old as Morse's reference to Massasoit's Spring. The story 
has simply been passed down by word of mouth from 
generation to generation and no man has ever been rash 
enough to question its truth. This is all the more 
remarkable because on the other side of Mount Hope is 
another spring which gushes forth not far from the spot 
where King Philip was killed. 

May I in the short time at my disposal endeavor to 
set forth the life the Indians and our ancestors lived in 
our earliest Colonial days! Of what kind of structures 
did the villages of the Indian consist? They were very 
rough and uncomfortabe places of abode, not entirely 
unlike those you may see to-day in the "Indian Country" 
of our western states and territories, and yet much ruder 
than are the wigwams, of to-day. The Indian we know has 
profited somewhat from his nearness to civilization. 

When the Plymouth representatives paid their first 
visit to Massasoit they found the Chief occupying a 
wigwam a little larger than those of his subjects. But 
when night came Massasoit and his wife occupied as a bed 
a platform of boards raised a little from the ground and 
covered with a thin mat. On this bed the Indian Sachem 
also placed his visitors with himself and his wife, "they 
at one end and the Englishmen at the other, and two 
more of Massasoit's men pressed by and upon them, so 
that they were worse weary of the lodging than of the 



107 

journey." The accommodation could hardly be called 
luxurious. 

The Indians were "lusty" men. The word "lusty" 
was then used as we use the word "husky " to-day in speak- 
ing of our football players. All our players are "husky" 
men though many of their fellow students are not. They 
are so because they are physically the best men that can 
be picked out from hundreds of undergraduates. The 
Indians were all "lusty" men from a different reason. 
As with the Zulus of South Africa it was with them, a 
case of the survival of the fittest. It was because all the 
weakly children died that our ancestors had such a race 
of athletes for their antagonists. 

The weapons they used were not of much account as 
compared with those the colonists carried, but they were 
so skilled in the use of them that they proved to be most 
formidable foes. The white men were rarely as "lusty" 
men as their opponents though their weakest died quickly 
in the terrible early years of the Plymouth Colony. But 
in weapons and equipment they far surpassed the savages. 
Our ancestors whom Massasoit saw were armed with 
muskets and swords. They wore helmets and corselets 
of metal. When metal was lacking they wore quilted 
corselets stiff enough to protect from Indian arrows. The 
Indian sachem and his men soon learned the superiority 
of the English equipment and governed their conduct 
accordingly. 

The earliest habitations of the Colonists were hardly 
more comfortable than were the wigwams of the Aborigine.-. 



io8 

Study the accounts given of the first houses in Ply- 
mouth and you will be convinced of the fact. Those log 
huts were built in a very rude way. Shelter only was 
sought for, luxury was not dreamed of. The chimneys 
were on the outside. No bricks were used in their 
construction because no bricks were made in the country. 
The very wide fireplaces were lined with stone, but the 
flues above were ordinarily built with what we might call 
light cordwood set in clay and plastered with the same 
material. Under such conditions it is hardly necessary 
to say that constant vigilance was necessary to prevent 
these primitive structures from taking fire. Dwellings 
like those our ancestors used may be seen to-day as you 
pass through the State of South Carolina on the railway 
trains. As far as comfort goes the negroes who inhabit 
them are much better off than the Plymouth colonists 

were. 

********** 

THE HISTORICAL ADDRESS DELIVERED BY 
COLONEL HIGGINSON. 

Colonel Higginson read as follows: 

MASSASOIT. 

The newspaper correspondents tell us that when an 
inquiry was one day made among visitors, returning from 
the recent Jamestown Exposition, as to the things seen by 
each of them which he or she would remember longest, one 



109 

man replied, "That life size group in the Smithsonian 
building which shows John Smith in his old cock-boat 
trading with the Indians. He is giving them beads or 
something and getting baskets of corn in exchange" 
(Outlook, October, 1907). This seemed to the man who 
said it and quite reasonably, the very first contact with 
civilization on the part of the American Indians. Precisely 
parallel to which is the memorial which we meet to dedi- 
cate and which records the first interview in 1620 between 
the little group of Plymouth Pilgrims and Massasoit, 
known as the "greatest commander of the country" and 
sachem of the whole region north of Narragansett Bay 
(Bancroft's United States, i, 247). 

"Heaven from all creatures hides the book of fate" 
says the poet Pope and nothing is more remarkable in 
human history than the way in which great events some- 
times reach their climax at once, instead of gradually 
working up to it. Never was this better illustrated than 
when the Plymouth Pilgrims first met the one man of this 
region who could guarantee them peace for fifty years and 
did so. The circumstances seem the simplest of the 
simple. 

The first hasty glance between the Plymouth Puritans 
and the Indians did not take place, as you will recall, until 
the new comers had been four days on shore, when, in the 
words of the old chronicler "they espied five or six people 
with a Dogge coming toward them, who were savages; 
who when they saw them ran into the Wood and whistled 



no 



the Dogge after them. " (This quadruped, whether large 
or small, had always a capital letter in his name, while 
people and savages had none, in these early narratives.) 
When the English pursued the Indians "they ran away 
might and main. " (E. W. Peirce's Indian History.) The 
next interview was a stormier one; four days later, when 
those same Pilgrims were asleep on board the " shallop " on 
the morning of December 8, 1620 (now December 19), when 
they heard "a great and strange cry" and arrow shots 
came flying amongst them which they returned and one 
Indian "gave an extraordinary cry" and away they went. 
After all was quiet, the Pilgrims picked eighteen arrows, 
some headed with brass, some with hart's horn (deer's 
horn), and others with eagles' claws" (Young's Chronicles 
of the Pilgrims, 158), the brass heads at least showing 
that those Indians had met Englishmen before. 

Three days after this encounter at Namskeket — namely 
on December 2 2d, 1620 (a date now computed as December 
23) — the English landed at Patuxet, now Plymouth. 
Three months passed before the sight of any more Indians, 
when Samoset came, all alone with his delightful salu- 
tation "Welcome Englishmen," and a few days later 
(March 22, 1621), the great chief of all that region, 
Massasoit, appeared on the scene. 

When he first made himself visible with sixty men, on 
that day, upon what is still known as Strawberry Hill, he 
asked that somebody be sent to hold a parley with him. 
Edmund Winslow was appointed to this office, and went 



Ill 



forward protected only by his sword and armor and carry- 
ing presents to the sachem. Winslow also made a speech 
of some length bringing messages (quite imaginary, per- 
haps, and probaby not at all comprehended) from King 
James, whose representative, the Governor, wished 
particularly to see Massasoit. It appears from the record 
written apparently by Winslow, himself, that Massasoit 
made no particular reply to this harangue, but paid very 
particular attention to Winslow's sword and armor and 
proposed at once to begin business by buying them. This, 
however, was refused, but Winslow induced Massasoit 
to cross a brook between the English and himself, taking 
with him twenty of his Indians who were bidden to leave 
their bows and arrows behind them. Beyond the brook, 
he was met by Captain Standish, with an escort of six 
armed men, who exchanged salutations and attended him 
to one of the best but unfinished houses in the village. 
Here a green rug was spread on the floor and three or four 
cushions. The governor, Bradford, then entered the house, 
followed by three or four soldiers and preceded by a flourish 
from a drum and trumpet which quite delighted and 
astonished the Indians. It was a deference paid to their 
sachem. He and the governor then kissed each other, as 
it is recorded (we have no information as to whether the 
governor enjoyed it) sat down together and regaled them- 
selves with an entertainment. The feast is recorded by 
the early narrator as consisting chiefly of strong waters, 
a "thing the savages love very well" it is said ''and the 



112 

sachem took such a large draught of it at once as made him 
sweat all the time he staied." (Thatcher's Lives of 
Indians, i., 119.) 

A substantial treaty of peace was made on this occasion, 
one immortalized by the fact that it was the first made with 
the Indians of New England. It is the unquestioned 
testimony of history that the negotiation was remembered 
and followed by both sides for half a century; nor was 
Massasoit nor any of the Wampanoags during his life- 
time convicted of having violated or attempted to violate 
any of its provisions. This was a great achievement! 
Do you ask what price bought all this? The price 
practically paid for all the vast domain and power granted 
to the white man consisted of the following items : a pair 
of knives and a copper chain with a jewel in it, for the 
grand sachem; and for his brother, Quadequina, a knife, 
a jewel to hang in his ear, a pot of strong waters, a good 
quantity of biscuit and a piece of butter. " (Thatcher's 
Lives of Indians, i., 120.) 

Fair words, the proverb says, butter no parsnips, but 
the fair words of the white men had provided the oppor- 
tunity for performing that process. The description 
preserved of the Indian chief by an eye witness was as 
follows: "In his person he is a very lusty man, in his 
best years, an able body, grave of countenance, and spare 
speech; in his attire little or nothing differing from the 
rest of his followers, only in a great chain of white bone 
beads about his neck; and at it, behind his neck, hangs a 



H3 

little bag of tobacco, which he drank, and gave us to 
drink — (this being the phrase for that indulgence in those 
days, as is found in Ben Johnson and other authors). His 
face was painted with a sad red like murrey (so called 
from being the color of the Moors) and oiled both head 
and face that he looked greasily. All his followers like- 
wise were in their faces, in part or in whole, painted, some 
black, some red, some yellow, and some white, some with 
crosses, and other antic works; some had skins on them, 
and some naked; all strong all men in appearance." 
(Young's Chronicles of the Pilgrims, 194.) All this Dr. 
Young tells us would have been a good description of an 
Indian party under Black Hawk which was presented to 
the President at Washington as late as 1837 and also, I can 
say the same of one seen by myself coming from a prairie 
in Kansas, yet unexplored in 1856. 

Lane tells us that in oriental countries smoking is called 
drinking and the aim of all is bring the smoke into the 
lungs. (Young's Chronicles of Plymouth, 188.) 

The interchange of eatables was evidently at that period 

a pledge of good feeling, as it is to-day. On a later occasion 

Captain Standish, with Isaac Alderton, went to visit the 

Indians, who gave them three or four ground nuts and 

some tobacco. The writer afterwards says, ' ' Our governor 

bid them send the king's kettle and filled it full of pease 

which pleased them well, and so they went their way." 

It strikes the modern reader as if this were pease and 

peace practically equivalent, and as if the parties needed 
a 



114 

only a pun to make friends. It is doubtful whether the 
arrival of a conquering race was ever in the history of the 
world marked by a treaty so simple and therefore noble. 

"This treaty with Massasoit" says Belknap, "was the 
work of one day," and being honestly intended on both 
sides, was kept with fidelity as long as Massasoit lived. 
(Belknap's American Biography, ii, 214.) In September, 
1639, Massasoit and his oldest son, Mooanam, afterwards 
called Wamsutta, came into the court at Plymouth and 
desired that this ancient league should remain inviolable, 
which was accordingly ratified and confirmed by the 
government, (Young's Chronicles of the Pilgrims, 194 
note), and lasted until it was broken by Philip, the succes- 
sor of Wamsutta, in 1675. It is not my affair to discuss 
the later career of Philip, whose insurrection is now viewed 
more leniently than in its own day, but the spirit of it 
was surely quite mercilessly characterized by a Puritan 
minister, Increase Mather, who when describing a battle 
in which old Indian men and women, the wounded and the 
helpless were burned alive said proudly, "This day we 
brought five hundred Indian souls to hell." (Pierce's 
Indian Biography, 22.) 

But the end of all was approaching. In 1623, Massasoit 
sent a messenger to Plymouth to say that he was ill, and 
Governor Bradford sent Mr. Winslow to him with medi- 
cines and cordials. When they reached a certain ferry, 
upon Winslow's discharging his gun, Indians came to 
him from a house not far off, who told him that Massasoit 



n5 

was dead and that day buried. As they came nearer, at 
about half an hour before the setting of the sun, another 
messenger came and told them that he was not dead, 
though there was no hope that they would find him living. 
Hastening on, they arrived late at night. "When we 
came thither" Winslow writes, "we found the house so 
full of men as we could scarce get in, though they used their 
best diligence to make way for us. There were they in the 
midst of their charms for him, making such a hellish noise 
as it distempered us that were well, and therefore unlike 
to ease him that was sick. About him were six or eight 
women who chafed his arms, legs and thighs to keep heat in 
him. When they had made an end of their charming, one 
told him that his friends the English were come to see him. 
Having understanding left, but his sight was wholly gone, 
he asked who had come. They told him Winsnow, for 
they cannot pronounce the letter 1, but ordinarily n in 
place thereof. He desired to speak with me. When I 
came to him and they told him of it, he put forth his hand 
to me which I took. When he said twice though very 
inwardly, Keen Winsnow? which is to say, Art thou 
Winslow? I answered Ahhe, that is Yes. Then he 
doubled these words, Matta neen wonckanet nanem, 
Winsnow : that is to say, O W'inslow, I shall never see thee 
again! Then I called Hobbamock and desired him to tell 
Massasoit that the governor hearing of his sickness, was 
sorry for the same; and though by many businesses he 
could not come himself, yet he sent me with such things 
for him as he thought most likely to do good in this extrem- 



n6 

ity ; and whereof if he be pleased to take, I would presently 
give him; which he desired, and having a confection of 
many comfortable conserves on the point of my knife, I 
gave him some which I could scarce get through his teeth. 
When it was dissolved in his mouth, he swallowed the juice 
of it; whereat those that were about him much rejoiced, 
saying that he had not swallowed anything in two days 
before. " (E. W. Peirce's Indian History, 25, 26.) 

Then Winslow tells how he nursed the sick chief, 
sending messengers back to the governor for a bottle of 
drink and some chickens from which to make a broth for 
his patient. Meanwhile he dissolved some of the confec- 
tion water and gave it to Massasoit to drink; within 
half an hour the Indian improved. Before the messengers 
could return with the chickens, Winslow made a broth of 
meal and strawberry leaves and sassafras root which he 
strained through his handkerchief and gave the chief who 
drank at least a pint of it. After this his sight mended 
more and more, and all rejoiced that the Englishman had 
been the means of preserving the life of Massasoit. At 
length the messengers returned with the chicken but 
Massasoit "finding his stomach come to him he would not 
have the chickens killed, but kept them for breed. " 

From far and near his followers came to see their 
restored chief who feelingly said "Now I see the English 
are my friends and love me: and whilst I live I will 
never forget this kindness they have showed me. " 

It would be interesting were I to take the time to look 
into the relations of Massasoit with others, especially 



ii7 

with Roger Williams, but this has been done by others, 
particularly in the somewhat imaginative chapter of my 
old friend, Mr. Butterworth, and I have already said 
enough. Nor can I paint the background of that strange 
early society of Rhode Island, its reaction from the stern 
Massachusetts rigor and its quaint and varied materials. 
In that new state as Bancroft keenly said, there were 
settlements "filled with the strangest and most incon- 
gruous elements ... so that if a man had lost his 
religious opinions, he might have been sure to find them 
again in some village in Rhode Island. " 

Meanwhile "the old benevolent sachem, Massasoit," 
says Drake's Book of the Indians, "having died in the 
winter of 1661-2," so died a few months after his oldest 
son Alexander. Then came by regular succession, Philip, 
the next brother, of whom the historian Hubbard says 
that for his "ambitious and haughty spirit he was nick- 
named 'King Philip.' " From this time followed war- 
like dismay in the colonies ending in Philip's piteous death. 
To-day as a long deferred memorial to Philip's father, 
Massasoit, with his simple and modest virtues, this 
memorial tablet has been dedicated. It may be said of 
Massasoit's career in the noble words of Young's "Night 
Thoughts," — 

"Each man makes his own stature; builds himself. 

Virtue alone outbuilds the Pyramids: 

Her monuments shall last when Egypt's fall. " 



DRUM ROCK 



Address by William B. Weeden, May 30, 1908 



The ground where we stand was conveyed to Samuel 
Gorton and ten others, for 144 fathom of wampum- 
peage, January 12, 1642. The deed describes "a parcell 
of lands, lyinge upon the west side of that part of the sea 
called Schomes Bay from Copassnetuxet, over against 
the outmost of that next of land called Shawhomett upon 
a straite line westward twenty miles." It is signed by 
Myantonomey the suzerain, with the significant statement 
"possession given with the free and joynt consent of the 
prisint inhabitants, being natives, as it appears by their 
hands." In another column are the signatures of Totono- 
mans, Pumham Sachem of Showhomet and Jano. When 
Pumham acted thereafter, Soccononocco generally 
appeared with him. I think he must have been either 
Totonomans or Jano, though I have not been able to 
trace the connection. The document is given by Judge 
Staples in his edition of Gorton 's "Simplicity 's Defense. "* 

Roger Williams, in another connection said, "I had not 
only Meantanomey and all the Coweset sachems my 
friends but Ousamaquin (a Wamponoag) also." Induced 

*R. I. Historical Colla., 2 p. 253. 



lip 

by the Arnolds, Pumham and Soccononocco went to Boston 
in 1643, an d submitted to the jurisdiction of Massachusetts. 
Cuchamakin, a Massachusetts sachem, testified to the 
General Court, that Pumham was as independent as 
himself. 

Samuel Gorton was one of the strongest individual 
minds Rhode Island ever had among her citizens. Judge 
Brayton in his defense of Gorton said, there "was no 
independent sachem between the Wampanoags and the 
Narragansetts. Pumham and Soccononocco were Coweset 
sachems."* Mr. George T. Paine, a careful student of 
Indian lore, defined Cowekesit, Cowekesuck or Cowesit 
to be the shore between Apponaug and Greenwich 
villages, thence westward to Crompton, and to mean 
"the place of the young pines." 

Drum Rock, that we commemorate, is a very large 
boulder partially sunk in the earth. Probably by glacial 
action or by frost, a large flat fragment estimated at two 
and one-half tons was broken off, lifted and nicely balanced 
on one edge of the cavity. Standing on the upper stone 
and throwing one 's weight on either foot, it easily rocks to 
and fro and drums on the boulder. The sound reverber- 
ates at a distance, and in the stillness of prehistoric time 
it must have penetrated much farther, with more solemn 
effect. 

According to tradition the upper stone was disturbed 
and moved by vandals about 1837. The villagers of 

*R. I. Historical Tracts, No. 17, p. 101. 



120 

Apponaug with considerable effort restored it, but were 
unable to bring back the old delicacy of balance; since 
then the sound has not extended so far. 

This statement would not have touched or impressed 
the native when Gorton and his companions settled at 
Shawomet. Whatever the facts his inductive convictions 
reached him differently. He knew nothing of glaciers or 
glacial action. He lived in close contact with nature, but 
not as we view her. His religion prompted him to worship 
sun, moon or stars; and he readily defied a great visible 
force, and in a sort of idealization of the bear or panther. 
Any pronounced manifestation of nature — especially if 
unusual — was to him supernatural, as we call it. Any 
marvel like Drum Rock fired his imagination at once, and 
gathered traditions about it, as time went on. Hence, 
this reverberating sound — fascinating to-day — was even 
more bewitching three centuries ago. Our tablet was 
literally true. 

"Drum Rock, a trysting signal and meeting 

place of the Coweset Indians and their kindred 

Narragansetts." 

The Shawomet tribes were a branch of the Narragansett 
nation, as the Niantics were on the west toward the 
Pequots. "All do agree they were a great people," said 
Roger Williams, and let us glance at his reports of their 
aboriginal life. There were many villages, possibly a 
dozen in twenty miles travel, and nowhere were they more 
teeming than by Coweset and along the Pequot path 



121 

by Sugar Loaf Hill and the little island of Nahnygansett 
in Point Judith Pond. The wigwams were covered with- 
out and lined within with mats of bark or skins; a hole for 
smoke at the top. "Those filthy smoakie holes" in the 
words of the narrator. But any house of the seventeenth 
century was not very agreeable in a northeast storm. 
Their implements were appropriate to the stone age, 
arrow heads, hatchets, mortars for beating corn, and 
chisels. 

The making of canoes excited Williams ' highest admira- 
tion; they were for three or four, sometimes for forty men. 
A native went into the woods with a stone hatchet and a 
basket of corn, built a hut and felled a chestnut tree. 
He continued "hewing and burning, lying there at his 
work alone," until in ten or twelve days he had finished 
and launched his boat. He then ventured to fish in the 
ocean. With their fleets of canoes the Narragansetts held 
Block Island in subjection. This fact alone would 
show the relative superiority of the Narragansett nation. 
The manufacture and sale of wampum had brought 
wealth from the interior, as far as the Mohawk country. 
They were beginning to be commercial and had risen 
above mere hunting tribes, as Columbus with his caravels 
ranked above a Castilian baron bent on hunt or foray. 
Hubbard says they were more civil and courteous than 
other natives. And Gookin, the enlightened superintend- 
ent of the Massachusetts Indians, said the Narragansetts 
were an "active, laborious and ingenious people." 



122 

In due season there was "wonderful plenteous hunting," 
and the women planted and tended corn with the clam- 
shell hoe. They gathered the crop and beat it in a mortar. 
They "barned" the reserved; in Philip's war, when our 
Indians were driven into interior Massachusetts, they 
occasionally foraged back for the corn cached in hollow 
trees and caves. "It is almost incredible what burthens 
the poore women carry of corne, of fish, of beans, of mats 
and a childe besides." We must not regard these divisions 
of labor by sex from our point of view. The Indian had 
faults enough, but he was not idle or dissolute until 
alcohol ruined him. There are two systems of labor; ours 
is regulated and continuous; the barbarian's is spasmodic 
and exhaustive. The Indian brave carried a little 
parched corn on the warpath or hunting tramp, tightening 
his belt as hunger increased. He exhausted all his 
strength in these masculine efforts; his squaw did the rest 
and did it cheerfully. 

Williams was more and more impressed by "their 
active and industrious habits" though the braves would 
do no agriculture except to raise tobacco. They used this 
moderately, and it served a symbolic function in their 
great smoking councils. One of these meetings for 
deliberation gathered nearly one thousand persons.* 
Johnson, the great Puritan, in 1637 was much impressed 
to "see how solidly and wisely these savage people did 
consider of the weighty undertaking of a war, especially 

♦Roger Williams, Key, p. 62. 



123 

old Canonicus, who was very discreet in his answers." 
Canonicus was one of the greatest aborigines history has 
recorded. 

Among themselves they were great gamblers, and there 
was a seamy side seldom lacking in their intercourse with 
whites. Their notions of property were very crude, and 
friendly as they were to Williams, they stole his goats 
from Prudence Island. After Pumham and Socononocco 
had intrigue with the authorities of Massachusetts, 
Gorton said they w r ere no better than cattle thieves. 
In conveying land, doubtless they meant to give up what 
they did not want for themselves. The "common sort" 
of Indians planted at Providence and Warwick without 
permission; they "mingled fields" with the English, and 
this made trouble. By the second generation, either race 
would be rid of the other. Canonicus gone, the brave 
but rash Canonchet joined in Philip 's injudicious war, and 
the Narragansetts w T ere nearly exterminated. 

Yet in their own living, their system worked not badly. 
Williams said *" the sachems have an absolute Monarchic " 
over the people "though they consulted and persuaded 
their constituents." Under such rule, vice and crime 
were not as scandalous as in Europe. "Commonly they 
never shut their doors day or night, and 'tis rare that any 
hurt is done." 

Tribal custom stood in place of ordinary law and active 
public opinion. Ultimately this must yield to organized 

•Key, p. 02. 



124 

government. Meanwhile, from the aboriginal point of 
view, there was little to be desired in the English 
system of government. We must remember the natives 
saw on one side the treacherous murder of Miantinomi, 
inspired by the petty state craft of the Boston Puritans; 
on the other they were oppressed by the jail and the 
whipping-post. In the religious life, the evolution was no 
better. Respect as we would the kindly labors of Williams 
and the apostolic sacrifices of Eliot, the actual results were 
meagre and almost nugatory. Goodkin said "the time of 
the great harvest of their (the natives*) in gathering is 
not yet come, but will follow after calling of the Jews." 
But Williams, charitable toward all Christian belief shows 
his naive and unseeing comprehension of the great 
sources of religion in this wise: "I durst never be an 
eyewitnesse, spectatour or looker on (at Indian ceremonies) 
lest I should have partake of Sathan's inventions and 
worships," as forbidden in Ephesians. 

The great romancer Fenimore Cooper exaggerated the 
nobility of the Indian, as Walter Scott overdrew the 
heroic qualities of his gillies and their Highland chieftans. 
We need not depreciate in our turn. Having immensely 
wider knowledge of racial conditions, we ought to be wiser 
than they were in the early nineteenth or the seventeenth 
century. Let us be just to a race living well in its own 
time. 

Inevitably, the Indian left few permanent monuments. 
Even in these small districts he was migatory, flitting from 



125 

winter quarters to "summer fields." He laid no corner 
stones, reared no columns or pyramids. Let us preserve 
and cherish this interesting memorial of his actual living. 
The moving rock sounds across the centuries and brings 
back the friendly owners of the soil. 

WILLIAM B. WEEDEN. 



PRESCOTFS HEADQUARTERS 



The Address of William Paine Sheffield, September JO, 1908 



Here occurred one of the most picturesque, daring and 
successful achievements of the American Revolution. 
When the details of many a carefully planned campaign 
have passed from popular notice, the American people will 
remember, and recount with pride the simple story of the 
capture of General Prescott by Colonel Barton. 

The possibility of the carrying off of its commander 
while surrounded by its army and protected by a friendly 
fleet, through the bold act of a mere handful of country- 
men, never entered the minds of the British forces on 
Rhode Island. It could never have been planned except 
by a bold and courageous man, and never have been 
executed, except by a well informed and sagacious leader, 
seconded by prudent and daring companions. 

While it was not one of the great events which were 
turning points in the struggle for independence, it came at 
a time when the American arms had few successes and it 
did much to encourage the people to persevere in the con- 
flict. It showed what a daring man with a few resolute 
companions may accomplish, and it is almost impossible 
to estimate its effect in arousing the people to exertion and 



127 

in bringing about the final result. As showing what 
individual effort, intelligently directed, may accomplish, 
it should be kept fresh in the memory of our country by 
spoken word and enduring bronze. The story has so 
much of the courage and the personality of the gallant 
Barton that when once the story is heard it is not easily 
forgotten. 

The colony of Rhode Island in its attitude and conduct 
in the great conflict for liberty and independence had a 
part which time can only make clearer and more resplend- 
ent. Before Concord and Lexington, here, on the waters 
of Narragansett bay, occurred the preliminary struggles 
which led up to the great conflict. Here, whatever of 
truth or fallacy lay in the cry "that taxation without 
representation was unjust and intolerable," a commercial 
and enterprising race of merchants, privateersmen and 
sailors, accustomed to the freedom of the seas, felt especially 
the heavy iron hand of the British navigation acts press 
upon their commerce and their liberties and they were 
early ready to resist. 

Here was the most magnificient bay upon the Atlantic 
coast, with its miles of seashore, its numerous outlets to the 
sea, open on every wind to sailing vessels for speedy 
entrance and exit. Harbors and centres of commerce 
developed in spite of the navigation laws, at Newport, 
near the Stone Bridge, at Bristol, Warren, Providence, 
East Greenwich bay, Wickford and elsewhere. There 
were no more hardy and experienced mariners than came 



128 

from the Rhode Island colony. Its bold privateersmen 
had not hesitated in the past to meet the enemies of Eng- 
land in ships and on the Spanish Main, and elsewhere. 
With the other colonies, Rhode Island resisted the enforce- 
ment of the stamp act and the sale of stamps, but alone of 
all the colonies, Rhode Island met the armed vessels of 
the king and opposed the enforcement of regulations unjust 
to her commerce and in violation of her liberties. When 
she found the rights she believed she was entitled to 
violated, she resisted, and, educated through all her 
colonial history to act independently, she did not wait 
for any other colony to act with her. The story of the 
"Squirrel," the "Liberty" and the "Gaspee" were prior 
in time and displayed a courage, a purpose and an independ- 
ence in resistance to Great Britain that no other colony 
equalled. Later, first of the colonies, Rhode Island 
declared her Independence. 

The Gaspee commission, by which it was sought to 
carry colonial offenders to England, to be tried there, 
instead of by their peers, in the vicinage, involved so great 
a violation of the principles of Anglo-Saxon liberty and the 
rights claimed by all the colonists that it awoke a respon- 
sive chord in the Virginia House of Burgesses. Virginia, 
the richest of the colonies, with little direct grievance 
against the crown, threw its great influence in union with 
other colonies, and George Washington, following the 
action of his colony, made a successful revolution possible. 

Recognizing the strategic importance of Narragansett 
bay, near to the centres of population, the British early 



129 

attacked its inhabitants and Wallace ravaged its shores. 
In December, 1776, Sir Peter Parker, with eleven ships of 
war and seventy transports, sailed through Long Island 
sound around the north end of Conanicut, and two 
English and two Hessian brigades under the command of 
Sir Henry Clinton with Earl Percy and Brigadier General 
Richard Prescott under him, landed on the island of Rhode 
Island, and in the succeeding years the people of this 
vicinity endured the hardships of war. This force, as 
compared with the American forces in the state, was 
overwhelming and the Americans could only withdraw and 
watch the enemy from the neighboring mainland. 

War at its best is hard, and in the latter part of the 
eighteenth century, with hired mercenaries, the treatment 
of the non-combatants was most severe. Officers, who 
might have been more courteous to a foreign foe, against 
colonists and rebels seemed to go at times to the extremes 
of cruelty toward the weak and helpless. On Jamestown, 
while W T allace was directing the driving off of the cattle 
of the inhabitants, Martin was shot down in cold blood 
at his own door. During the British occupation of Rhode 
Island, especially after Clinton and Percy in succession had 
left, and the command fell to Prescott, every day brought 
tales of tyranny and oppression of innocent and defense- 
less people (their relatives, friends and countrymen) to the 
American forces stationed at Tiverton. 

To the small boy in Newport, even to this day, the 
word " tyrant " conjures up the picture of General Prescott, 

8 



*30 

an irascible man, somewhat advanced in years, walking 
on the east side of Spring street, along the only stone 
sidewalk in the neighborhood of his headquarters at the 
Bannister house, on the corner of Pelham street, and 
striking off with his cane the hats of the careless youth who 
too slowly saluted the resplendent general, heedless if 
with his cane he missed the hat and struck the head of the 
young rebel. Next to George III himself, in July, 1777, 
Prescott represented to the people of Rhode Island that 
ideal tyrant so eloquently portrayed in the Declaration of 
Independence. One can well imagine how the sympathetic 
heart of the Rhode Island commander at Tiverton, facing 
a superior force, yearned to do some act that would show 
that tyrant, and all likely to imitate him that he could not 
oppress with impunity women and children. 

William Barton was born at Warren, May 26, 1748, 
says his biographer, Mrs. Williams, in her interesting 
account gathered from his own lips and from those of this 
contemporaries; he was brought up in the manner of the 
times, for boys along the sea shore. He had a common 
school education, was bound out to a trade, married at 
twenty-two and carried on in his own shop at Providence 
the trade of a hatter. A lover of his country, listening 
with deep resentment to the wrongs of his fellow-citizens, 
he heard in Providence the distant guns of Bunker Hill. 
The next day he left his shop and joined the Americans at 
Cambridge, and continued through the siege of Boston. 
Then returning to Warren, enflamed by the cruel acts of 
Wallace, he remained to defend his native state. 



i3i 

While in charge on Rhode Island, Barton made his head- 
quarters at the Bailey place, near the One Mile Corner. 
On the 13th of August, 1776, that staunch old patriot 
pastor, Ezra Stiles, records in his diary "at Newport, 
viewed the brigade of 1,500 men; part of them drawn up 
on the Parade and exercised by Major Barton." 

It was during this period that he thoroughly familiar- 
ized himself with the different parts of the island, which 
was so useful to him later. With the advent of Sir Henry 
Clinton and the fleet, Barton withdrew his men to the 
mainland and remained in command, under Colonel 
Stanton, of the American force at Tiverton, guarding 
Howland 's ferry and the east passage. 

This force, recruited from New Hampshire, Connecticut, 
Rhode Island and Massachusetts, consisted of Colonel 
John Topham 's and Colonel Archibald Crary 's regiments 
and Colonel Robert Elliott's artillery. Here Barton did 
what he could to alleviate the sufferings of those who 
escaped from Prescott's tyranny, and listened to the 
stories of the oppression of old men and women by the 
British and Hessian regiments quartered among them. 

About this time, the American forces were greatly 
annoyed by the capture of General Lee, who was held by 
the British and exchange refused because the American 
had do captive officer of equal rank to offer. They keenly 
felt it as a disgrace that an American officer of high rank 
should remain a prisoner unexchanged. 

Colonel Barton, doomed to inactivity in the face of a 
superior foe, pondered over the situation of General Lee 



132 

and grieved at the oppression of his countrymen in 
Rhode Island. In June, a Mr. Coffin escaped from the 
island and brought to Barton an accurate and detailed 
description of the location of General Prescott here in the 
Overing house. A man, a negro servant from Mr. Over- 
ing's kitchen had later confirmed Mr. Coffin and it is 
probable that Colonel Barton himself had secretly, with 
his own eyes, viewed the disposition of the forces and the 
general situation about the Prescott headquarters. 

Having obtained permission of Colonel Joseph Stanton, 
Jr., his superior, he determined to carry out the apparently 
desperate scheme he had conceived wholly by himself 
of by one bold act avenging the wrongs of his countrymen 
upon their oppressor and furnishing to the American a 
captive general of equal rank to General Lee and suitable 
for his exchange. 

Besides himself, he selected five officers and about forty 
men from the regiments at Tiverton. They were all 
volunteers for an unknown peril, picked for their courage, 
skill and prudence; many of them residents of this island 
and vicinity, familiar with the location they were to visit. 
The names of many of these men are still borne on this 
island and in the neighboring towns — Samuel Potter, 
John Wilcox, John Hunt, Nathan Smith, Isaac Brown, 
Oliver Simmons, Jack Sherman, Joel Briggs, Samuel 
Cory, James Weaver, Joseph Dennis, Pardon Cory, 
Thomas Wilcox, Jeremiah Thomas, Thomas Austin and 
others. 



133 

On the first anniversary of the Declaration of Independ- 
ence, Barton, under cover of darkness, with his volunteers 
in five whale-boats, set forth and, scattered by a severe 
storm, were delayed at Warren. At Hog island they 
viewed the British fleet, gathered off the Rhode Island shore 
at the end of Prudence and not far from Hope island, and 
the men learned for the first time the desperate undertaking 
in which they were engaged. But no man faltered. Thence 
they pushed on to Warwick neck, where there was an 
American battery, and here they were again detained by 
the weather. On the evening of July 9, 1777, Barton, his 
officers and men embarked in their five boats on their 
perilous expedition, with those last wise instructions — 
to preserve the strictest order, to have no thought of 
plunder, to observe profound silence, and to take with them 
no spirituous liquors. 

Barton, with a handkerchief on a ten-foot pole in the 
first boat, so that the others might follow, led the way. 
They rowed between Patience and Prudence and hugged 
the shore of Prudence as they passed around the south end 
of the island, close to the hostile fleet, hearing distinctly 
the sentinels calling, "all's well." Then they pushed 
directly for the Rhode Island shore, landing at the mouth 
of the creek under the shelter of a sand bluff. They left 
one man with each boat and pushed forward towards the 
Overing house, passing to the south of the Peleg Coggeshall 
place and up the ravine to the road. 

All about lay the British forces. A little way off to the 
north, at the Redwood place, was General Smith, second in 



134 

command, and part of his force was stationed near; 
and just to the south of his house, in a building, were 
quartered a body of light horse. Twenty-five yards from 
the gate stood a sentry, alert but secure in the protection 
of a disciplined army and a formidable fleet against a 
discouraged and undisciplined foe. 

General Prescott had returned late from a feast given by 
the Tory Bannister, supplied in part by the cargo of a rich 
prize brought into Newport that day, and was sleeping 
soundly on the first floor of the house. Major Barrington, 
Prescott 's aide, Mr. Overing and his son comprised the 
remaining male occupants of the house. 

Barton pushed boldly across the road from the ravine, 
directly towards the sentry. To his demand for the 
countersign, they asked if he had seen any deserters that 
night, all the time advancing, until John Hunt, the stal- 
wart artilleryman from Portsmouth, seized and silenced 
the sentry and they entered the house. Of the five boat 
parties, one stayed on guard at the road, one each guarded 
the three doors of the house, on east, south and west 
sides. Barton and the other party entered the house, first 
arousing Overing and his son in the second story. 
Major Barrington was taken as he jumped from the 
window in the second story. The negro forced the locked 
door to the room in which Prescott was in bed, and Hunt 
seized the astonished general. Scantily dressed, without 
his shoes, Prescott and his aide were dragged, supported 
upon the shoulders of his captors, through the fields. 



i3S 

They started in a straight line for the shore, across a rye 
field. They pushed off from the shore, with their pris- 
oners, soon followed by rockets and the alarm in the army 
and the fleet. No wonder Prescott exclaimed to Colonel 
Barton: "You have made a damned bold push tonight." 
As the boat passed in the darkness through the midst of 
the British fleet he must have felt that he did not deserve 
well at the hands of the Americans, as he said "he hoped 
they would not hurt him." Thomas Austin, who had been 
whipped by Prescott 's orders with 300 lashes, because he 
refused to yoke his oxen with which to draw British cannon, 
until the physician protested he conld not survive, 
was probably only one of others among Barton 's men who 
either in person or their relatives had suffered ill treatment 
at Prescott 's hands. Still Colonel Barton put his coat 
about him and Prescott was well cared for, and on the 
following Saturday, the flag of truce brought him his 
wardrobe, his purse, his hair powder and a plentiful supply 
of perfumery. 

Thus was successfully accomplished one of the most 
daring feats of courage in the war. Professor Diman in 
his interesting discourse on the centennial anniversary of 
the event says: "Let us estimate at its true value the 
enterprise which we have come to commemorate to-day. 
An enterprise leading to no important military or political 
results, yet deserving to be kept forever in remembrance 
as showing what manner of men they were who dared 
hurl defiance in the lace of a powerful empire and who 



136 

waged a successful war with resolute and highly disciplined 
foes. What they did, a hundred years of a united and 
independent nation remains to show; what they were, can 
best be learned from such exhibitions of individual daring 
and resolution as have made this a memorable spot not 
only in Rhode Island, but in American history. 

Astonished at the audacity of the act, even the British 
had little sympathy with Prescott. The London Chronicle 
of that period even held him up to ridicule. 

"What various lures there are to ruin man, 
Women, the first and foremost, all bewitches. 
A nymph thus spoiled a general 's mighty plan, 
And gave him to the foe without his breeches." 

His capture brought joy to the American people, as 
well as in Rhode Island, as relief from a coarse and oppres- 
sive tyrant, who had cursed Ethan Allen when his prisoner 
and had him bound hand and foot, and whose harsh and 
arbitrary rule at Newport had been most obnoxious to the 
patriots. 

To the army of the north, the exploit occasioned great 
joy and exultation. It lifted for an instant the anxious 
cloud from Washington 's face as he announced to Congress 
the "bold enterprise." Even across the sea, Louis, King 
of France, was pleased and sent to Colonel Barton for a 
personal detailed account of the affair, for his pleasure and 
information. 

Barton was made a brevet colonel in the continental 
line and subsequently received a sword voted by Congress. 



i37 

The Rhode Island legislature expressed by resolution its 
appreciation of the brave act of its gallant citizen, and it is 
fitting that to-day the committee of the Historical Society, 
with means furnished by the General Assembly of the 
state, should mark in permanent form by lasting bronze 
this spot. 

We like to think that this act of Barton's was one 
especially characteristic of those born and reared within 
the territory of this little state, among a people inured to a 
hardy life on the borders of the ocean, and independent in 
colors and education. Other states and neighboring 
Massachusetts, with their citizens trained to united action 
in the rigid school of religious uniformity, have accom- 
plished much in the history of the nation, but it has espec- 
ially belonged to those from Rhode Island in every stage 
of its history to act with courage and independence. 
Roger Williams, alone among the Indians with his idea of 
religious freedom; Barton, not weighing odds of numbers 
or discipline when he thought his country demanded the 
capture of a tyrannical enemy; Perry on Lake Erie, saving 
the northwest to the Union, are but examples. 

We can take new courage to-day, as we rehearse the 
incidents which here occurred. It must have seemed 
to Barton, as with his meagre, undisciplined force he 
faced the numerous forces, fully trained and equipped, 
of the British army in Rhode Island, protected by the 
fleet, that individual effort and courage could accom- 
plish nothing; yet with great care, through knowledge 



138 

of the situation and a courageous execution of the plan 
he had conceived, he was able to seize the commander 
of that army, bringing consternation for a time to the 
enemy; keeping that enemy busy in Rhode Island while 
the American army in the north, inspirited by his act, 
persevered in that campaign which led to the surrender of 
Burgoyne at Saratoga. 

To-day, in the larger field of our expanded nation, 
with the rush of pressing events and the vastly more 
complex forces at work, it seems that individual effort can 
accomplish nothing in the great problems of civil life 
and constitutional government. Still, we believe, as of 
old, the intelligent work and daring courage of the indi- 
vidual alone, make possible ultimate success. 

WILLIAM PAINE SHEFFIELD, JR. 




c 



THE ADDRESS OF MR. DAVID W. HOYT 



At the Indian Quarry, October 17, 1908 



In expending the money appropriated by the State of 
Rhode Island, the Committee on marking historical sites 
have made selections relating to different periods, extend- 
ing from prehistoric times down to the civil war. Some 
relate to the white settlers who founded the State; some 
to the colonial wars, the war of the revolution, or the 
civil war; others to individuals who have been eminent 
in the pursuits of peace, as well as of war. Of the thirteen 
tablets already placed, three pertain to the red race who 
occupied the land long before the white man came here. 
One, on the east side of the bay, marks the spring called 
by the name of Massasoit; another, on the west side of 
the bay, marks the "Drum Rock, a Trysting signal and 
meeting place of the Coweset Indians and their kindred 
Narragansetts. ' ' To-day we mark another notable Indian 
locality, north of the bay, one suggestive of the arts of 
peace, with which we do not so frequently associate our 
aboriginal predecessors. 

Here is found a ledge of steatite, or soapstone, much of 
it containing imbedded crystals of siderite, or carbonate 
of iron. On weathering, the siderite absorbs oxygen and 



140 

moisture from the air, and disintegrates, yielding limonite, 
or iron rust, which gives its characteristic color to portions 
of the ledge long exposed to the air, and eventually dis- 
appears, leaving small pits, or holes, in the stone. In 
this respect it differs from many other specimens of soap- 
stone; and articles made from it may often be thus iden- 
tified. The stone of a pot now in the museum of Brown 
University, found at Potowomut, beneath ten feet of soil, 
is filled with such pits, showing unmistakably its origin. 
This ledge is reported to be about 25 feet in thickness, 
having a dip to the east, and lying between walls of harder 
rock. It has, at times, been uncovered for about 90 feet. 
The quarry was first opened, in recent times, in 1878, by 
Mr. Horatio N. Angell, on whose land it was located. 
In 1878 and 1879 it attracted much attention. A com- 
mittee of the R. I. Historical Society, consisting of Rev. 
Frederic Denison, Zachariah Allen and Wm. G. R. 
Mowry, examined the locality and made a report to the 
society, which has been preserved. It was also visited by 
F. W. Putnam, who published an account of it in the 
eleventh annual report of the Peabody Museum, in 1878. 
Professor Jenks, of Brown University, took four photo- 
graphs, which have been preserved. It should be remem- 
bered that since the photographs were taken, and the 
earliest accounts were written, much stone has been taken 
from the ledge and put to various practical uses, some of it 
having been ground to powder. Moreover, the best 
specimens of the handiwork of the Indians have been 



141 

carried away, and are now to be found in the museums of 
Brown University, Roger Williams Park, Peabody, and 
the Smithsonian Institution; and in private collections. 

Ledges of soapstone are quite common in New England, 
and the rock of these ledges is so soft and has such 
valuable properties that it has been worked in our 
own time for a variety of purposes; but the distin- 
guishing peculiarity of this location is, that when the ledge 
was first uncovered the fullest evidence was found that 
it was the workshop of the Indians, who carved from this 
ledge of soft stone "pots, pans, dishes and pipes." It is 
stated, in the report to which we have referred, that "from 
the excavations and their surroundings have been removed 
about three hundred horse cart loads of the stone chips 
left by the Indian workmen." The largest excavation 
was found partly filled with dirt, debris and Indian art, 
some whole stone pots, some partly finished pots, some 
only blocked out, numerous stone hammers," etc. It 
was stated that "the sides and bottom of this excavation 
contain about sixty distinct pits and knobs of places where 
pots and dishes were cut from the rock, while all parts bore 
marks and scars made by the stone implements of the 
swarthy quarrymen." 

Professor Putnam estimated that three or four hundred 
pots were made from one part of the ledge alone, and that 
"several thousand must have been taken from the whole 
ledge." He also estimated that at least two thousand 
rude stone chisels or picks "had been found on the ledge, 



142 

or in the immediate vicinity." These were made of 
serpentine or from the hard stone of the adjoining ledge, 
averaging about seven inches in length, "rudely chipped 
to a blunt point at one end, and roughly rounded to fit 
the hand at the other." With these chisels were found 
seventy-five to one hundred rounded stones "weighing 
from twenty-five to one hundred pounds each, which might 
have been used as hammers for the purpose of breaking off 
large masses of the soapstone." 

Those who carefully studied the ledge when first 
uncovered decided that the Indians first worked the out- 
side of the pot, the top still being in contact with the ledge. 
The stone of the ledge was chipped off around, and to 
some extent under the mass, or "pot-bowlder," which 
was then broken from the ledge, turned over, and the 
hollow worked out. 

This ledge is far from being uniform in character in its 
different parts. The soapstone is penetrated with harder 
rock in various places, so that only portions were found to 
be workable. There were, therefore, excavations of 
varying size, separated by harder rock. The soapstone 
itself was softer in some parts of the ledge than in others. 
The quarrymen seem to have worked the vein five or six 
feet in width, to a depth of ten or twelve feet, till harder 
rock was struck on the sides and on the bottom. 

It seems probable that the upper portions, first worked, 
might have been composed of purer steatite, without the 
iron compound which made it less durable and less 



143 

desirable. A small soapstone pot, finely finished, now in 
the museum of Brown University, is almost wholly com- 
posed of pure steatite; but a portion of the top contains 
small pit holes which may indicate that in working it out 
the Indians may have struck a little of the lower stratum 
of this ledge, containing crystals of the iron compound. 

It is worthy of note that in the same report of the 
Peabody Museum which contains the account of this 
Johnston quarry is found an account of a soapstone 
ledge in California, there called "potstone," near a spring, 
like this one, from which the Indians quarried pots and 
other utensils, with scrapers or chisels of quartz or slate. 
The method of working out the pots was identical with 
that employed here; but the utensils were of better finish 
and of later date. 

Soon after this Johnston quarry was uncovered, one at 
Fed Hill, Bristol, Conn., was explored, and many dishes 
were found there, in various stages of manufacture. 
The methods of work were in general like those employed 
here. The outside of the pot was fashioned first, while 
the top was attached to a block detached from the ledge, 
instead of being attached to the ledge itself. It is sug- 
gested that this variation was because the "soapstone- 
like" material was poorer for the purpose, being a variety 
of fibrous hornblende, with talc. 

Somewhat similar ledges and quarries, or "crockery- 
shops," have been reported in New Hartford and Litch- 
field, Conn., in Massachusetts; and, outside of New 



144 

England, in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia and 
other states. The one which we now mark, however, 
seems to be superior in value to any other New England 
pot-quarry, in processes of manufacture which it has pre- 
served. The historian Hutchison states that "the 
Narragansetts were distinguished for mechanical arts and 
trade, and furnished earthen vessels and pots for cooking 
to the adjacent tribes." 

The Indians made the most suitable choice of location 
and material for their purposes. Located at the head of 
Narragansett bay, there was easy communication with 
both east and west sides of the bay, and with the north. 
In this respect, this ledge is typical of the manufactures 
of our own day which have grown up in the same vicinity. 
Soapstone is soft and was easily worked with the tools 
which they possessed. It would stand any amount of 
heat which they required for cooking, and retain the heat 
for a long time, without cracking to pieces like a quartz 
rock, or turning to powder like limestone. 

The report of the committee of the Rhode Island 
Historical Society, to which we have referred, contained a 
recommendation that the "large excavation" be pre- 
served by taking "a section of the ledge, to measure about 
twelve feet in length and nine feet in width, and seven 
feet in depth, or of such size as may seem to be most suit- 
able," and removing it to some spot in Roger Williams 
Park," on a slope within sight, at least, of the statue of 
the founder of the State." In December, 1879, "the 



H5 

citizens of Providence and of the State" were asked to 
contribute the sum of six hundred dollars for the purpose 
of carrying this plan into effect. Probably the plan was 
not carried out on account of the lack of funds, for at least 
a portion of the " large excavation" is still here. Let us 
hope that whatever now remains, that is plainly the work 
of the Indian race, may be allowed to remain here, unde- 
faced, just where the work was done. 

DAVID W. HOYT 

10 



STEPHEN HOPKINS 



Address by William E. Foster, May 5, J 909 



We are met to-day to commemorate a name richly 
deserving of grateful remembrance, and yet strangely 
destitute, through all these years, of any adequate com- 
memoration. Until now, no statue nor bust, nor portrait 
nor tablet, have been set in place, to the memory of Stephen 
Hopkins, within the limits of Rhode Island. 

It is true that the memory of a great man may endure 
notwithstanding the absence of these memorials; and to 
this fact the wide fame of Stephen Hopkins to-day is 
itself a notable testimony. And yet a community honors 
itself in honoring those whose efforts have laid the founda- 
tion of its own greatness; and Stephen Hopkins is emphati- 
cally entitled to the high distinction of founder, whether 
we regard his career in its relation to the City of Provi- 
dence, the State of Rhode Island, or the United States 
of America. 

For us, morever, the tablet is the most fitting variety of 
commemoration, rather than any form of pictorial repre- 
sentation, for unfortunately Stephen Hopkins left behind 
him no portrait; and the representation of him familiar 
to us through Trumbull's great group picture of the 
"Signers" was sketched from his son's face. 




The Stephen Hopkins House, Hopkins Street, Provtoenci 



147 

It is fitting also that the memorial tablet should be 
placed on the walls of this plain and unassuming building 
which Hopkins occupied for so many years; for by its 
very simplicity it cannot fail to remind us of the homely 
virtues of one of the greatest of our public men. 

As citizens of Providence, we are interested not only in 
this building, in which the last forty-three years of Stephen 
Hopkins's long and useful life were passed, and in which, 
moreover, he died, in 1785, but we are interested also in 
his birth, which occurred in 1707, but on the other side of 
the river. Contrary to a curiously persistent tradition, 
to the effect that Stephen Hopkins was born on the hills 
of Scituate, he was born within the limits of what is now 
(in 1909) the City of Providence, not far from the corner 
of Broad and Sackett streets, as was clearly established 
through some extended researches* from twenty-five to 
thirty years ago. This locality is included in a strip of 
land which was from 1754 to 1868 a portion of the town of 
Cranston, f and was re-united to Providence in 1868. 

In or about 1742, after a boyhood and early manhood 
passed on the Scituate hills, where his younger brothers 
were actually born (Scituate having become a separate 
town in 1731), Stephen Hopkins removed to the parent 
community of Providence, to occupy this house. At that 
time Providence was still a small and uninfluential com- 
munity. The first century of its settlement had closed 
only six years before, in 1736, and its influence was still 

•See W. E. Foster's "Stephen Hopkins." V. 1, p. 9-10; V. 2. p. 209. 215-17. 
tlbid.. V. 1, p. 9. 



148 

of minor importance, as compared with that of Newport, 
in the affairs of the Colony. To quote from what has 
been written elsewhere, — "It had no custom-house (and 
no great development of commerce, as yet) ; no post-office ; 
no town-house; no school-houses; no college; no library; 
no public market-house; no state-house; no bank nor 
insurance office; no printing press and no newspaper."* 
The first bank, the first insurance office, and the first 
custom-house came into existence after Hopkins's deathj 
(though his own labors were largely responsible for 
bringing them into existence), but with most of the other 
activities just enumerated the historian of Providence 
finds that Stephen Hopkins was closely connected, as 
an active founder. After this length of time, in the year 
1909, concerned as we are with the multiform activities 
of this city of more than 200,000 people, while we recognize 
in Roger Williams the planter of the infant community, 
we may also recognize in Stephen Hopkins the man who 
laid the foundation of its greatness. 

One of his contemporaries, Asher Robbins, who had 
carefully studied his influence, wrote of him, after his 
death, that he was one of those "men who might say, as 
Themistocles said: 'True, I do not understand the art 
of music, and cannot play upon the flute; but I understand 
the art of raising a small village into a great city. ' " J 

*Foster's "Stephen Hopkins," V. 1, p. 86,87. 

tlbid., v. 1, p. 87. 

{Ibid., v. 2, p. 114. (In Providence Journal, August 8, 1836.) 



149 

Most fittingly, therefore, do we to-day, as citizens of 
Providence, set up this tablet in grateful commemoration 
of the services of Stephen Hopkins. 

But we are also citizens of the State of Rhode Island, 
as well as of the City of Providence; and this suggests 
another aspect of Hopkins's career. To each branch of the 
government of the colony, — legislative, judicial and 
executive, — he gave many years of service, and in each one 
of these he rose to the head. As early as 1741, while 
in the General Assembly, he was elected Speaker. As 
early as 1751, he became Chief Justice of the Superior 
Court. As early as 1755, he was elected Governor and 
he was, as stated on the tablet which is now set up, "ten 
times Governor of Rhode Island." In nine of these 
instances he was elected in the usual way, the other 
instance being due to the need of filling a vacancy. On the 
13th of March, 1758, the General Assembly chose Stephen 
Hopkins as Governor, to fill the unexpired term (about 
two months) of the late Governor William Greene, who 
had died in February, 1758. In the internecine warfare 
of the Ward and Hopkins contests, there is much on which 
we of the present day cannot dwell with pleasure, but in the 
approaching contest with Great Britain, his words have 
an inspiring ring. It was in 1773, during the proceedings 
in connection with the burning of the Gaspee, that he 
made the determined announcement, as Chief Justice: 
I will ''neither apprehend by my own order, nor sutler 
any executive officer to do it, "* — thus effectually blocking 

♦Foster's "Stephen Hopkins," v. 2, p. 95. (From letter of E*ru rftiles, February 1G, 1773. ) 



i5o 

the transportation to England of any citizens of Rhode 
Island. Moreover, while he was thus conserving the right 
of the individual citizen of the colony of Rhode Island, he 
was also ensuring the continued existence of this colony, 
in its separate form, at the time when one of the Royal 
Commissioners was recommending that it should be 
''consolidated with Connecticut. " 

As citizens of Rhode Island, then, do we set up this 
tablet in grateful commemoration of the services of 
Stephen Hopkins. 

And yet after all, Hopkins's chief distinction rests upon 
the wider service which he rendered, in the formation of 
the republic of the United States. 

It is one of the "commonplaces of history," so far as we 
in Rhode Island are concerned, that "Stephen Hopkins 
signed the Declaration of Independence." But so did 
fifty-four other Americans, of varying degrees of eminence. 
But while Hopkins was performing a great public service 
in the seventies (i. e., in the Eighteenth Century), so he 
was also in the fifties and in the sixties. Parenthetically, 
it may be said that Stephen Hopkins, born in the earliest 
decade of the Eighteenth Century (in 1707), was, in 
1776, in his seventieth year, with the active portion of his 
life already behind him, rather than in front of him as was 
the case with Thomas Jefferson, and various other members 
of the Continental Congress. In so brief and condensed 
an inscription as this (and an inscription ought always 
to be brief and condensed) there is not, of course, room to 



i5i 

record his participation in the Albany Congress of i i 754.* 
This was the conference in which seven of the American 
colonies participated; and among the delegates were 
Benjamin Franklin and Stephen Hopkins, — two patriotic 
and public spirited Americans, who were not only closely 
contemporary with each other, so far as the dates of their 
birth and death are concerned, but between whom there 
is an astonishing degree of resemblance, so far as their 
habit of mind, point of view, and participation in public 
movements are concerned. The " plan of union " proposed 
by this congress, was brought forward by Franklin, and 
was approved by Hopkins, both by tongue and pen. 
This plan, says Judge Prince, was "in advance of the 
Articles" (of Confederation) "in its national spirit, and 
served as the prototype of the Constitution itself. "| 
The very noteworthy pamphlet published by Stephen 
Hopkins, here in Providence, in 1755, after his return from 
congress ("a true representation of the plan formed at 
Albany"),! is the only instance of a printed exposition of 
this kind on the part of any member of the congress. The 
"national" principle in it, as distinguished from the 
individualistic principle, was one which plainly appealed 
to Hopkins's type of mind. 

Ten years later, when the stamp act was under discus- 
sion, throughout the length and breadth of the American 
colonies, Stephen Hopkins put into print his carefully 

♦Foster's "Stephen Hopkins, " v. 1, chapter 6. 

fli. B. Prince's "The article of Confederation vs. the Constitution," p. 19. 

JFoatcr's "Stephen Hopkins," v. 2, p. 199-200. 



i5* 

reasoned argument on "The rights of colonies examined. " * 
As is well known, these few years, from 1764 to 1767, were 
prolific in pamphlets of this kind dealing with colonial 
conditions. But when so intelligent (and at the same 
time, unfriendly), an observer as Governor Thomas 
Hutchison, of the Massachusetts Bay Province, the emi- 
nent loyalist, remarked of Hopkins's pamphlet, that this 
was "conceived in a higher strain than any (memorials) 
that were sent out by the other colonies, "f he expressed 
an accurate judgment. "It rose higher," to quote from 
language published elsewhere, J "and at the same time 
struck deeper, because it was a carefully considered expres- 
sion of the extreme ground occupied by one of the two 
charter colonies." The phraseology of this pamphlet's 
title is worthy of careful attention. It is not (as it is 
sometimes quoted), "Rights of the colonies examined," 
but "The rights of colonies examined." Hopkins does 
not confine his consideration of the subject to the existing 
conditions, but going back to the beginning, he examines 
the conditions of colonies in general, and is thus enabled 
to make a telling and impressive argument. It should not 
be overlooked, moreover, that this was an argument 
proceeding from a colony which had still retained its 
charter. The charter colonies of Connecticut and Rhode 
Island, says the late Alexander Johnston, "held for more 
than a century the extreme advanced ground, to which all 

*Ibid., v. 2, p. 200. 

tHutchinson'a "Massachusetts Bay," v. 2, p. 115. 

^Foster's "Stephen Hopkins, " v. 2, p. 68. 



153 

the other commonwealths came up in 1775." The posi- 
tion of such a colony, he adds, "kept alive the general sense 
of the inherent colonial rights which only waited for asser- 
tion, upon the inevitable growth of colonial power."* 
At least two editions were published here in Providence, 
but so great was the demand for it, that it was soon after 
reprinted elsewhere. William Goddard, the Providence 
printer of that day, stated, in the Providence Gazette, that 
it was "reprinted from the Providence edition in almost 
every colony in North America, "f And wherever it 
was printed, says Mr. Frothingham, the historian of this 
period, it "met with large commendation. "J In 1776, 
after it had about two years of careful reading from the 
colonial leaders, it was reprinted in England, by John 
Almon, the London printer. The London reprint ap- 
peared with an altered title, namely, " The grievances of 
the American colonies candidly examined ;"§ and the 
late Moses Coit Tyler, in his "Literary history of the 
American Revolution," remarks that "This English 
alteration in the title was in itself a tribute to the 
author."** 

There is one sentence in the letter of a New York 
merchant of the time, written in commendation of 
Hopkins's pamphlet, which is worth noticing, for the 

♦Johnston's "The genesis of a New England State," p. 29. 

tProvidence Gazette, May 11, 1765. 

{Frothingham's "The rise of the republic," p. 172. 

{Foster's "Stephen Hopkins," v. 2, p. 201. 

•♦Tyler's " Literary history of the American Revolution, " v. 1, p. 65. 



154 

significant use which it makes of the term, " this country. "* 
"Even thus early the people in whose minds Franklin and 
Hopkins were dropping the seeds of union and nationality 
were learning to talk of a common country. " 

Rhode Island herself had learned the lesson well, — at 
least, so far as the tendencies towards union and independ- 
ence were concerned. To quote once more from the 
published "Life" of Hopkins, "She was the first colony 
to instruct her delegates against the stamp act, the only 
one whose governor refused to take the oath to enforce 
it; the only colony from which came any printed defense 
of the Albany plan of union in 1754; the colony from which 
came the first official call for a congress in 1765; the first 
colony to call for a Continental Congress in 1774, and the 
earliest to elect her delegates to the first Continental 
Congress ; the colony in which the first overt act of resist- 
ance to Great Britain had occurred; the state which had 
anticipated by two months the passage of the Declaration 
of Independence by the Congress (the event whose anni- 
versary was celebrated in this city yesterday) ; the state, 
moreover, which had anticipated the general government, 
in adopting a general postal system, and in raising and 
equipping a naval armament for national defense; and 
finally, the state through whose direct motion these latter 
functions, unquestionably national as they were, had been 
assumed by the general government."! 

♦Printed in Boston Evening Post, March 25, 1765. 
tFoster's "Stephen Hopkins," v. 2. p. 148-49. 



155 

On two accounts the historical student finds occasion 
for keen regret that Stephen Hopkins's active days (and 
in particular his original physical vigor) had passed, before 
the critical period extending from the Declaration of 
Independence to the adoption of the Constitution in 1787. 
(Indeed, when the latter event came on, Stephen Hopkins 
had already been in his grave for two years.) 

The first of these occasions for regret is in connection 
with his career in congress, where his efforts were largely 
paralyzed by almost continuous ill health. And yet, even 
as it is, the record of his services in congress is a long and 
crowded one,* and it is especially noteworthy in connection 
with the movement made to assume national functions, in 
the matter of a navyf and of a postal service. 

The second of these occasions for regret is in connection 
with the attitude of Rhode Island towards the adoption 
of the Federal Constitution. " Speculation, " in historical 
matters, is usually fruitless; and the present instance is no 
exception to the general rule. And yet, when we recall 
how Hopkins's successful leadership of public opinion 
was at all times a distinguishing feature of his public 
career, and when we also remember how closely he had been 
identified, from the beginning, with the national, as dis- 
tinguished from the particularistic view of government, 
we need not hesitate to conclude that Rhode Island's 
attitude, in the years 1785 to 1790, would have been 

*It occupied four pages, even in the condensed form in which it appears, in Foster's 
"Stephen Hopkins," v. 2, p 237-41. 

fFoster's "Stephen Hopkins," v. 2, p. 234-30. 



156 

materially modified if he had been alive and in vigor of 
his early career. 

But, without giving further consideation to regrets, — 
unavailing and fruitless as they are, — there is enough in 
this phase of Stephen Hopkins's career, the national 
phase, to confer on him no common distinction. 

Not only, therefore, as citizens of Providence, and of 
Rhode Island, but as citizens of the United States, do we 
set up this tablet in grateful commemoration of the 
services of Stephen Hopkins. 

The house itself, to which the tablet is affixed, although 
not of the greatest antiquity, is of considerable interest. 
As indicated on the tablet, the site on which it now stands 
is not its original location; and yet we have good ground 
for thankfulness that its removal in 1804 transferred it to 
a position only a few feet away from its former site at the 
foot of the hill, where it occupied what, at the end of the 
Eighteenth Century, was the corner of the Town street 
and Bank Lane.* Here, not far from the wharves and the 
shipping, with which so large a part of Stephen Hopkins's 
activities were concerned, and in the development of 
which he and his family played so important a part,f 
stood this plain, dignified and comfortable house of the 
olden time. 

If its aged walls could speak, they would tell us of many a 
distinguished guest entertained here, including George 

♦Foster's "Stephen Hopkins," v. 1, p. 81. 
tlbid., v. 1, p. 99-100. 



i57 

Washington, the greatest of them all, in April, 1776.* 
They would speak of the conferences, formal and informal, 
held here, which led to the founding of a college, which 
led to the founding of the Providence Library in or about 
1754, or which led to the improvement of the town's 
business facilities. 

Within its walls Stephen Hopkins himself carried on his 
own studies and pursued his own wide range of reading. 
Few men have ever digested so perfectly the results of 
their reading, and except for the sage and meditative 
mood in which this reading was pursued, with ample 
time for reflection on what he read, he would not have 
extorted from John Adams, late in life, his admiring 
comments on the results of this Rhode Islander's reading 
and studies. f 

We place then this tablet on the walls of no ordinary 
house, with the hope and expectations that it may trans- 
mit to generations yet to come the memory of one of the 
greatest of Rhode Islanders. 

WILLIAM E. FOSTER. 



*Ibid., v. 2, p. 113-14. 

t" Works" of John Aclama, v. 3, p. 11-12. 



GENERAL NATHANAEL GREENE HOUSE, 
CUMBERLAND 



The Address of William MacDonald 
June 24, 1909 



Professor William MacDonald, speaking informally of 
the life and work of General Greene, quoted the remark of 
Jared Sparks, the American historian, that Greene was 
"the most extraordinary man in the army of the Revolu- 
tion," and sketched briefly the story of Greene's life from 
the time when, as a private soldier, he joined the army at 
Cambridge. 

Greene came of distinguished parentage, having the 
inestimable advantage of being well born. His love of a 
military life forced him out of the Quaker sect in which he 
was bred, and led him to read widely and to good purpose 
in such military literature as he could get hold of; and 
he was noted as the best read officer in the army on military 
history and military science, as well as in the law of 
nations. He was an organizer of the Kentish Guards at 
East Greenwich, a man of sound judgment in business 
matters, a member of the colonial assembly, and a member 
of the commission to revise the military laws of the colony. 




V. 



159 

It was Greene's misfortune never to win an important 
battle, but he bore the disappointment without com- 
plaining, and his reputation as a commander rose rather 
than fell with every engagement that he fought. He 
early formed a profound admiration for Washington, which 
was returned in full measure; and none of the generals 
of the revolution stood on such intimate terms with 
Washington. Washington's opinion of his worth was 
well illustrated in his selection of Greene to take command 
in the south when, as he said, he was unable to give 
detailed instructions because of lack of information regard- 
ing conditions, but must leave Greene to follow his own 
judgment. The large number of officers of high rank who 
desired to accompany him to the south was another 
proof of the worth in which he was held by his military 
associates. Historians of the revolution have agreed 
in praising the brilliancy of Greene 's campaigns in the 
south, and to him must be ascribed the principal credit 
for driving the British from that region and thus pre- 
paring the way for Yorktown; but he must be accorded 
almost equal credit for the skill with which he managed 
the leaders of the partisan bands, Marion, Sumter. 
Pickens, and others. 

Greene had a hasty temper, and a habit of criticising 
his associates and superiors which more than once got him 
into trouble, and often caused his motives to be mis- 
understood. What distinguished him above his fellows, 
however, was his studiousness, his willingness to serve the 



i6o 

American cause in any capacity, however humble, his 
careful attention to the details of command, his unbroken 
loyalty to Washington, and his confidence in the final 
success of the patriot cause. The deliberate judgment of 
historians has unhesitatingly placed him next to Wash- 
ington among the revolutionary leaders; while among 
the public men of Rhode Island, he is easily the most 
distinguished. 

WILLIAM MacDONALD. 



ESEK HOPKINS 



The Address of Nathan W. Littlefield, Esq., October 27, 1909 



We have assembled to-day to dedicate a memorial tablet 
in honor of Esek Hopkins, first commander-in-chief of 
the American navy. 

The tablet states that Esek Hopkins, 17 18-1802, first 
commander-in-chief of the American navy lived in this 
house. 

It commemorates a historic fact well deserving public 
attention. For, however men may differ in their estima- 
tion of the ability and energy of the man thus honored, 
there can be no question that the American navy had its 
inception in idea and fact in Rhode Island, and that Esek 
Hopkins was one of its leading advocates and promoters 
and its first commander-in-chief. 

It is the fortune of some men to be extravagantly praised 
and extravagantly blamed and criticised during their 
lifetime and after. Esek Hopkins has thus suffered by 
the partiality of well meaning friends and the hostility 
of enemies and unfriendly critics. 

Somewhere between these extremes of praise and 
criticism lies the proper and just estimate of his character 
and achievements. 



162 

If he was not a great military or naval hero like Perry, 
Farragut and Dewey, neither was he the pusillanimous 
selfseeker which some have labored to prove him. 

Amid a mass of conflicting evidence, it is my task and 
will be my endeavor to find and portray the real Esek 
Hopkins. 

First of all he was well born. The Hopkins family of 
Rhode Island is as ancient as the colony itself. Thomas 
Hopkins was the associate of Roger Williams at its plant- 
ing. The family was distinguished for learning, ability 
and public spirit. 

Stephen Hopkins, governor of the colony, chief justice 
of the Supreme Court, member of the Continental Con- 
gress and signer of the Declaration of Independence, was 
one of America 's greatest statesmen, a man who shone at 
the bar and upon the bench, in the counsels of the colony, 
and of the nation and in the company of wits and learned 
men. 

John Adams, who was one of those who were delighted 
with Stephen Hopkins's wit, wisdom and erudition, has 
drawn a charming picture of him among his friends. In 
the maternal line Esek Hopkins was a member of the 
Wilkinson and Wickenden families, both conspicuous in 
the annals of the colony and state for learning and ability. 
Family traditions and example, therefore, — most powerful 
influences in the formation of character, — favored and 
stimulated his intellectual and moral development. He 
became well educated, judged by the standards of his time, 
especially in mathematics. 



1 63 

In person he appears to have been large and com- 
manding, having a strong, expressive and agreeable 
countenance. 

He was fond of society and his genial disposition and 
ready wit made him a leader in the social life of his time. 

He was fortunate in having been born and reared upon a 
farm on the healthgiving highlands, now a part of Scituate, 
yet near enough to the sea to hear its persuasive call to 
strong, ambitious, enterprising men. 

At the age of twenty, he shipped as a raw hand on a 
vessel bound from Providence to Surinam. Very soon he 
was in command of a vessel and rapidly acquired reputa- 
tion as a skillful captain and merchant. Three of his 
brothers, William, John and Samuel, were famous sea 
captains, but Esek surpassed them all in enterprise and 
business sagacity. 

Before he was forty years of age he was in command of a 
fleet of seventeen merchantmen controlled and mostly 
owned by the Hopkins family. 

On November 28, 1741, being then twenty-three years 
of age he married Desire Burroughs, daughter of Ezekiel 
Burroughs, a leading merchant and one of the most 
influential citizens of Newport. He made Newport his 
home thereafter until 1752 or 1755. Newport at that time 
was a place of some seven thousand inhabitants and the 
most important seaport in the country. Its commerce 
extended to Africa, China and India. 

To the profits of regular commerce her merchants added 
great fortunes from privateering, especially during the 



164 

French and Spanish wars. It is certain that some of the 
captains of privateers were not given to making nice 
distinctions regarding the nationality of their captures. 

Esek Hopkins engaged in privateering with courage, 
skill and success, but with a strict regard for the rights of 
neutrals. There is no stain of freebooting upon his record. 

Several times he acquired fortunes and had them swept 
away by the vicissitudes of business and war, yet he finally 
accumulated a large estate to comfort his declining years 
and enrich his children. He suffered, also in his later life 
greater misfortunes than losses of wealth, — the ruin of a 
fine reputation. Yet even this he endured with singular 
equanimity and cheerful fortitude. 

If adversity be a test of character, it must be admitted 
that Ezek Hopkins when tried as by fire showed no base 
metal in his composition. 

Soon after his return to Providence he acquired by several 
purchases a farm of about 200 acres in the northern part of 
the town where he resided during the remainder of his 
life. The sea and the farm appear to have equally shared 
his affection. He had also the capacity for friendship, and 
his home was the seat of a generous hospitality where his 
many friends delighted to gather. 

This love of the sea and the farm and the society of his 
friends reveals a broad and noble nature. It is difficult to 
believe that a man of such affection could have been petty, 
mean, or ignoble. 

Having acquired the confidence and esteem of his fellow 
citizens by his business ability and integrity and his large 



i65 

experience in important affairs closely related to the public 
welfare he almost necessarily became prominent in public 

life. 

Ambitious he probably was. But ambition has never 
been deemed a grievous fault in this country. Was his 
ambition honorable or base, was it selfish or patriotic,— 
that is the question, the answer to which must be sought in 
his attitude on public questions, his written and spoken 
words and his aim and purpose,— not his success in office. 

It is significant that the first office which he held was as 
a member of a committee chosen to have the care of the 
"townes schole and of appointing a schole master" and 
the last was that of trustee of Rhode Island College, which 
he held during the last twenty years of his life. 

The abiding interest in the case of education thus dis- 
played indicates a mind and purpose of high order. 

As a member of the general assembly of the colony 
from May, 1762, to October, 1764, when he resigned the 
office to again follow the sea, he received the support of 
the leading citizens of the colony and maintained an 
honorable standing in that body. 

From 1764 to 1768 he was mostly engaged in long voy- 
ages to the far east. On his return he was elected a mem- 
ber of the general assembly for North Providence, which 
had been set off from Providence during his absence. 

Again in 1771, he represented the town in the general 
assembly, and for three years thereafter was returned as 
the first deputy from that town. He was then fifty-three 



1 66 

years of age, about thirty-five Jof which he had passed 
upon the sea. He had gained an ample fortune and 
probably intended to retire from active business pursuits 
and pass his remaining years upon his farm with his family 
and among his friends. 

Thus far his life had been unusually fortunate and 
happy. 

His renown as an experienced and successful merchant 
and commander of ships extended throughout the com- 
mercial world. He was respected, trusted, honored. 
Therefore, when hostilities broke out between the colonies 
and England, it was natural that Rhode Island first and 
then all the colonies should turn to him as a leader and 
commander. He was first elected commander-in-chief 
of the forces of the colony and rendered valuable and 
efficient service in fortifying the approaches to Providence, 
and in preventing the destruction of Newport by wise 
negotiations with the commander of the British fleet. 

On August 26, 1775, the General Assembly of Rhode 
Island instructed their delegates "to use their whole 
influence, at the ensuing Congress, for building at the 
continental expense, a fleet of sufficient force for the pro- 
tection of these colonies." To Rhode Island is due the 
credit and distinction of originating a plan for constructing 
a navy for the defense of the colonies. The " Rhode Island 
plan" as it was called met, however, with great opposition 
in the debates which followed the presentation of the 
resolutions of the General Assembly to Congress. 



167 

The delegates from Massachusetts and Connecticut 
warmly supported the measure, those from Virginia, 
Maryland and South Carolina opposed it. 

It is significant that the alignment was practically the 
same when afterwards the commander-in-chief of the navy 
was censured by Congress. 

In October, 1775, Congress appointed a marine com- 
mittee of seven members to consider the building of a navy. 
Stephen Hopkins was chairman of the committee and John 
Adams, Richard Henry Lee, Christopher Gadsen and Silas 
Deane were among its members. 

John Adams in his memoirs says, "The pleasantest 
part of the labors for the four years I spent in Congress 
was in the committee on naval affairs." It was a strong 
committee. Its members were deeply interested in the 
success of the new navy. 

When, therefore, on November 5, 1775, they unani- 
mously chose Esek Hopkins commander-in-chief of the 
fleet which by direction of Congress they were fitting out, 
it is certain that they made the best selection possible in 
their judgment. 

Though Stephen Hopkins was the chairman of that 
committee and undoubtedly interested in the welfare of 
his brother, it is incredible that his judgment should have 
been warped by favoritism or that the other strong men 
of the committee would have unanimously concurred in 
making an appointment which they did not believe to be 
for the best interest of the country. 



i68 

Is it probable that a man who in a letter to his brother 
regarding his appointment used this language, "I suppose 
you may be more serviceable to your country in this very 
dangerous crisis of its affairs by taking upon you this com- 
mand than in any other way" was capable of imperilling 
the safety of his country in his desire for his brother's 
promotion? 

The charge of favoritism assumed that there were other 
men of greater experience and reputation in naval affairs. 
Who were they? 

It is a matter of history that Rhode Island led all the 
colonies in commerce and in privateering. She had several 
able captains engaged in these occupations, but Esek 
Hopkins in his service of about thirty-five years upon the 
sea had acquired a reputation for skill, sagacity and 
courage superior to all others. 

The appointment was well received by those best 
qualified to judge of its fitness, the captains and other 
officers of the fleet. 

Great things were expected of Esek Hopkins and the 
little fleet of eight vessels when at Philadelphia, on a clear 
frosty morning of January, 1776, he stepped on board his 
flag ship, the Alfred, and first lieutenant John Paul Jones 
at a signal from Captain Salstonstall hoisted the first flag 
of the American navy, a yellow silk flag displaying a 
lively representation of a rattlesnake about to strike and 
the motto "Don't tread on me." 

That these expectations were only partly fulfilled must 
be admitted. That the fleet under the command of 



169 

Admiral Hopkins accomplished much is also true. The 
failure to meet the anticipations of Congress and the people 
may have been due to their overestimate of the strength 
of the fleet, or a lack of knowledge of the difficulties and 
obstacles which it had to meet, or the incompetence of its 
commander, or a combination of some or all of these 
conditions. 

The friends of Hopkins attributed his lack of complete 
success to the existence of difficulties and obstacles which 
no skill or daring could overcome. His enemies declared 
that it was due to incompetence and disobedience of the 
orders of the marine committee. What are the facts? 

When the fleet sailed out on the 17th of February, 1776, 
Hopkins had orders from the marine committee to seek 
out and attack the enemies' ships in Chesapeake bay 
and on the coast of North and South Carolina and then 
to proceed to Rhode Island and destroy the British fleet 
there. But his orders dated January 5, 1776, also con- 
tained this sentence. "Notwithstanding these particular 
orders which it is hoped you will be able to execute if 
bad winds or stormy weather or any other unforeseen 
accident or disaster disable you so to do then you are to 
follow such courses as your best judgment shall suggest to 
you as most useful to the American cause and to distress 
the enemy by all means in your power." 

Soon after the sailing severe sickness broke out among 
the officers and men of the fleet. Fierce northeasterly 
storms were encountered. The enemies ' ships had sought 



170 

refuge in the harbors. To approach the coast and sail 
into harbors occupied by hostile fleets in such storms, was 
to offer the enemy an advantage which the commander 
did not deem it prudent to give. His orders left much to 
his discretion and covered just such an emergency. 
There was the greatest need of powder for the use of the 
army. It was known to the marine committee and to 
Hopkins before he sailed that there were large stores of 
powder and other munitions of war at New Providence in 
the Bahamas. It is probable, to say the least, that it was 
expected by the marine committee that an attempt would 
be made to capture these stores, if the main object of the 
expedition could not be accomplished. Hopkins used the 
discretion permitted him by his orders, sailed to New 
Providence and seized such an amount of cannon, small 
arms, ammunition and other articles that it required two 
weeks to transfer them to his ships and to a hired transport, 
all which were deeply loaded with the spoils. On his 
return north he captured near the east end of Long Island 
two small armed vessels one of which contained a large 
amount of ammunition, arms and stores. About one 
o 'clock the next morning while the deeply laden fleet was 
slowly working its way eastward in a light wind they 
encountered the British frigate Glasgow. The Cabot, 
commanded by Captain John B. Hopkins, began the 
engagement as soon as it got within range of the enemy. 
A fierce battle followed in which one after another of the 
American ships were engaged. The flagship Alfred after 



171 

three hours of fighting was disabled by a shot which 
crippled her steering gear and put her out of the conflict. 
About half past six in the morning the Glasgow crowded 
on sail, eluded her pursuers and bore away for Newport. 
The captain of the Glasgow undoubtedly handled his 
ship bravely and skillfully, but he was greatly favored by 
the light winds which prevailed during the conflict by 
which the deeply laden ships of his opponents were badly 
handicapped in their movements. 

Would it have been prudent for Hopkins to have con- 
tinued the pursuit with his heavily laden ships, with crews 
diminished by sickness and the manning of his prizes, 
with the certainty of meeting the British fleet coming out 
from Newport able to outsail and outmaneuvre him by 
reason of their lighter loading? 

The answer to this question will determine whether 
Hopkins w r as blameworthy in this action. 

John Paul Jones, in his entry for the day in the log 
book of the Alfred, says that the Glasgow at third glass 
"by crowding on all sail bore away and at length got a 
considerable way ahead, made signals for the rest of 
the English fleet, at Rhode Island, to come to her assist- 
ance and steered directly for the harbor. The commander 
then thought it imprudent to risk the prizes by pursuing 
further; therefore, to prevent our being decoyed into their 
hands, at half past six made signal to leave off the chase." 
He also says that "an unlucky shot carried away the 
wheel block and ropes," and that "the ship became 



172 

unmanageable, and leaking, the main mast shot through 
and the upper works and rigging badly damaged." 

Neither at that time nor at any later time did John 
Paul Jones question the ability or the courage of Com- 
mander Hopkins. In a letter to Joseph Hewes of the 
Committee of Naval Affairs the same brave and out- 
spoken officer says, "I have the pleasure of assuring you 
that the commander-in-chief is respected through the fleet, 
and I verily believe that the officers and men would go any 
length to execute his orders." It is evident that John 
Paul Jones attached no blame to the commander and his 
opinion ought to satisfy any reasonable man on this point. 
The exploit of Commander Hopkins at New Providence 
was hailed with rejoicing throughout the country. John 
Hancock, its president, in the name of Congress, con- 
gratulated him on the success of his expedition and added 
"Though it is to be regretted that the Glasgow made her 
escape, yet as it was not due to any misconduct, the praise 
due you and the other officers is undoubtedly the same." 
Unfortunately, however, dissensions arose among the 
captains and officers of the fleet by reason of the Glasgow 
escape. Captain Abraham Whipple of the Columbus 
demanded an investigation by court martial of charges of 
cowardice which were made against him by some of his 
fellow officers and was acquitted. Captain Hazard of the 
Providence was found guilty by court martial of mis- 
conduct in the engagement and was relieved of his command 
in which he was succeeded by John Paul Jones. These 



173 

proceedings gave prominence to an incident which other- 
wise would probably have received little attention from the 
country. When the fleet put into New London after the 
engagement upwards of two hundred sick men from the 
various ships were sent ashore. Hopkins landed some of 
the captured guns there and sent some to Dartmouth, 
Mass., and to Newport. Subsequent events showed that 
it would have been wiser for Hopkins to have returned to 
Philadelphia instead of proceeding to New London 
with his fleet. Less independence on his part and greater 
subservience to the authorities at Philadelphia would have 
won favor which afterwards he sorely needed. 

Having secured one hundred and seventy recruits from 
the army he sailed for Providence on April 24, 1776, where 
he was making preparations for another cruise when the 
recruits were withdrawn. Sickness still prevailed in the 
fleet and one hundred more men unfit for duty were landed. 
Troubles accumulated. The wages of the sailors and 
marines were unpaid. They became dissatisfied and dis- 
heartened. The commander could not obtain money 
from the authorities to pay them. Discipline in the fleet 
also was lax from lack of sufficient authority in the com- 
mander. At this time he wrote to Congress, "I am ready 
to follow any instructions that you may give at all times, 
but am very much in doubt whether it will be in my power 
to keep the fleet together with any credit to myself or to 
the officers that belong to it without power to dismiss 
such officers as I find slack in their duty." But he was 
not given this power. 



174 

Another cause which operated powerfully against 
Hopkins's success in manning his fleet was privateering. 
Many of the merchants of Rhode Island were engaged in 
this profitable business. The rewards of this service were 
much greater than those of the navy. It was found impos- 
sible to enlist men for the navy against the superior induce- 
ment of private service. 

Hopkins appealed to the General Assembly to lay an 
embargo on privateering. He labored at one time 
among the members to secure the passage of an act of that 
kind, but some of them were interested in the business and 
selfish interests prevailed and the measure was defeated 
by two votes. He had also still further antagonized cer- 
tain powerful men by exposing and fiercely denouncing 
their improper conduct in building two frigates for the 
government. Under such circumstances Hopkins was 
summoned before Congress to answer charges of dis- 
obedience of orders on his southern cruise. His answer 
to the charges is marked by good temper and sound 
reason. In passing judgment on this matter it should not 
be forgotten that envy and jealousy and sectional feeling 
were prevalent; that Washington himself was bitterly 
assailed and accused of inaction and incompetence and 
nearly ruined by the same causes which were operating 
against Hopkins. 

John Adams earnestly defended Hopkins when the 
charges were considered by Congress. Admitting that 
the commander-in-chief might have committed some 



i75 

error through inexperience in handling a fleet, he stoutly 
denied that there was anything in Hopkins 's conduct which 
indicated corruption or want of integrity. Adams says 
in a letter written shortly after, "On this occasion I had a 
very laborious task against all the prejudices of the gentle- 
men from the southern and middle states and of many from 
New England. I thought, however, that Hopkins had 
done great service and made an important beginning of 
naval operations. 

It appeared to me that the Commodore was pursued 
and persecuted by that anti-New England spirit which 
haunted Congress in many of their other proceedings as 
well as in this case and that of General Wooster. 

Experience and skill might have been deficient in several 
particulars, but where could we find greater experience or 
skill. I knew of none to be found. The other captains 
had not so much and it was afterward found that they had 
not so much." 

This is the most important evidence given by a member 
of the Marine Committee who was greatly interested in 
the success of the navy. Congress passed a vote of censure 
upon Hopkins, not because he had displayed lack of skill 
or experience or courage, but specifically because he "did 
not pay due regard to the terms of his instructions" upon 
his southern cruise, in which instructions they had 
expressly allowed him much latitude of discretion. It has 
been argued that in defending Hopkins, John Adams was 
defending himself, because Adams was a member of the 



176 

committee which made Hopkins commander-in-chief of 
the navy. This assumes that Adams had greater regard 
for Hopkins 's reputation than for the welfare of the navy 
and the country. Is it not more likely that Adams would 
be tempted to make a scapegoat of Hopkins in order to 
shield himself and the Marine Committee and Congress 
from criticisms which had been made upon them on 
account of the failure of the fleet to accomplish what 
had been expected of it? 

Adams afterward wrote: — "this resolution of censure 
was not in my opinion demanded by justice and con- 
sequently was inconsistent with good policy, as it tended 
to discourage an officer, and diminish his authority by 
tarnishing his reputation." In another letter Adams says 
that he "could never discover any reason for the bitter- 
ness against Hopkins, but that he had done too much." 

John Paul Jones in a letter dated September 4th, 1776, 
written at sea to Admiral Hopkins, when he was misin- 
formed, as it seems, regarding the censure of Hopkins, 
says: "I know you will not suspect me of flattery when 
I affirm that I have not experienced a more sincere pleas- 
sure for a long time past than the account of your having 
gained your cause at Philadelphia in spite of party. Your 
late trouble will tend to your future advantage by point- 
ing out your friends and enemies. You will thereby be 
enabled to retain the one part while you guard against the 
other. You will be thrice welcome to your native land and 
to your nearest concerns. After your late shock they will 



177 

see you as gold from the fire, of more worth and value, and 
slander will learn to keep silence when Admiral Hopkins is 
mentioned." 

Brave and able men do not write such letters to men 
whose courage and ability are in doubt. 

Why did not Admiral Hopkins upon the passing of the 
resolution at once resign his commission? 

In the light of subsequent events that would appear to 
have been the best course for him to have pursued. He 
may have been urged by friends to retain his command. 
He may have hoped to retrieve his reputation by greater 
success and improved fortune. Moreover, he had good 
reason to believe that Congress did not attach much con- 
sequence to its censure. For within one week after the 
passage of the resolution the Marine Committee ordered 
him to dispatch four vessels on a cruise to Newfoundland 
and authorized him to purchase and fit out the Hawk 
which he had captured on his former cruise and to rename 
it the Hopkins. Judge Staples justly remarks: — "Such 
a compliment is seldom paid to an inefficient or unfaithful 
officer." The expedition to Newfoundland failed as 
did the one to North Carolina which the Marine Com- 
mittee ordered. Hopkins exerted himself to the utmost 
to mann his ships and again failed from the same causes 
and influences which had before defeated his plans. 

In a letter to the Marine Committee he says, "I thought 
I had some influence in the state I have lived in so long, but 
find now that private interest bears more sway than I wish it 

12 



i 7 8 

did. I am at a loss how we shall get the ships manned as I 
think near one-third of the men which have been shipped 
and received their monthly pay have been carried away in 
the privateers. I wish I had your orders whenever I 
found any man on board the privateers giving me leave to 
not only take him out but all the rest of the men; that 
might make them more careful of taking men out of the 
service of the state." 

But this authority was not given him. Yet by with- 
drawing all the well men from some of the vessels he was 
able to man and send out from time to time the Andrea 
Doria, the Cabot, the Columbus and the Providence on 
various cruises, and they did effective work in destroying 
the enemies' commerce, capturing about fifty prizes in a 
few months. Matters went from bad to worse. The 
Marine Committee became exasperated with Hopkins's 
delays by reason of which it was severely criticised and 
Hopkins was much discouraged. While affairs were in 
this state, in December, 1776, a powerful British fleet 
sailed into Newport harbor and effectually bottled up the 
American fleet, which never again emerged as a fleet from 
Narragansett bay, though it rendered valuable service in 
protecting Providence from the enemy. 

Nothing demoralizes an army or navy like inaction. 
Pent up at the head of the bay, discontent and insubor- 
dination bred among the officers and men. A few of the 
inferior officers of the fleet became actively hostile to the 
commander. They would probably have been powerless 



179 

to injure him except for the countenance and support of 
influential men upon shore whom he had deeply offended 
by his uncompromising attitude toward privateering 
when it conflicted with the interests of the navy. 

A small cabal of these men secretly prepared and sent a 
petition to Congress against their commander. Some of 
the charges are so frivolous and absurd as at once to excite 
suspicion of the motives which inspired them. Three of 
the signers of the petition, including the chaplain of the 
fleet, admitted that they were induced to sign it by some 
gentlemen of the town and afterward over their own signa- 
tures confessed that the charges which they had made were 
not true. 

Admiral Hopkins in his reply to these charges exposed 
the conspiracy against him and the motives of his assail- 
ants. 

Lieutenant Richard Marvin, the prime mover in this 
affair, was brought before a court martial, consisting of 
six captains and seven lieutenants, who appear to have 
been all the officers of the fleet. The findings of the court 
martial were that Marvin had "treated the Commander- 
in-Chief of the American Navy with the greatest indignity 
and defamed his character in the highest manner by sign- 
ing and sending to the Honorable Continental Congress 
several unjust and false complaints against the Com- 
mander-in-Chief in a private and secret manner," "'that 
he was unworthy of holding a commission in the American 
Navy" and that "he deliver up his commission to the 



i8o 

Commander-in-Chief." This finding is of the greatest 
value in determining the merits of the controversy not 
only because it exonerates Admiral Hopkins, but because 
it is the testimony of men who had known the Commander 
for years and who had the best opportunity for obtaining 
knowledge of his true character. No amount of criticism 
can break the force of these findings. They are the find- 
ings of the proper court for trying such questions, — the 
court by which the charges against Admiral Hopkins 
should have been examined. 

A careful examination of the proceedings before the 
Marine Committee upon the complaints of his subordi- 
nates shows that whether by his own fault, or otherwise, 
Admiral Hopkins did not have a full, fair and impartial 
trial. 

It could not be impartial; because his judges were the 
very persons whose orders he had been accused of disobey- 
ing and of whom it was charged that he had spoken dis- 
respectfully, — and this was one of the most serious charges 
made against him. 

It was not a full trial; for an officer of his rank should 
not have been condemned without an examination of all 
the officers of the fleet. 

It was not a fair and impartial trial; because his judges 
were his accusers and were greatly prejudiced against 
him, and interested in making him a scapegoat for their 
own failure to properly support him as the commander- 
in-chief of the fleet. 



181 



As there was in his day, so there probably will always 
continue to be a wide difference of opinion regarding 
Admiral Hopkins 's success as a naval commander, and the 
justice of the action of Congress in dismissing him. 

That he was a sincere patriot who served his country 
with ardent devotion to the best of his ability and that he 
was untainted by corruption of any kind few will doubt. 

In the day of his adversity the people of Rhode Island 
stood by him. They did not accept the action of Congress 
as just or well founded. The opinions also of men like 
John Adams, William Ellery, delegates to Congress, 
James Manning, President of Rhode Island College, and 
John Paul Jones are entitled to great weight. They all 
expressed high esteem and respect for Mr. Hopkins after 
he had been censured by Congress and remained his life 
long friends. 

In a letter to William Ellery he expressed a noble inten- 
tion regarding his future course in these words: — "I am 
determined to continue a friend of my country, neither do 
I intend to remain inactive." 

At the next election after his dismissal from the naval 
service he was sent as a deputy to the general assembly 
from North Providence and represented that town from 
1777 to 1786. He was also during that time a member of 
the council of war appointed by that body and served on 
several committees which had charge of military affairs 
and aided in raising and drilling troops. In 1782 he was 
elected a trustee of Rhode Island College and served in that 



182 

capacity until his decease. In these and in other ways he 
served the state in the spirit of his letter to William Ellery 
for many years. 

Amid the increasing infirmities of age and disease which 
for several years disabled him for active pursuits he 
maintained a cheerful disposition and deep interest in 
public affairs and in his friends, until on February 26, 
1802, he fell asleep and was gathered to his fathers. 

A careful consideration of the evidence touching upon 
the career of Esek Hopkins, without partiality and with- 
out bias, leads, I think, to these conclusions; that he was 
the ablest, most enterprising and successful sea captain 
of his time; that he was a true patriot and served his 
country with unselfish devotion; that as commander-in- 
chief of the first naval fleet of the country, in a new and 
untried position ; without sufficient rules for his guidance 
and for the discipline of the fleet and without sufficient 
authority to enforce such discipline; without adequate 
support by Congress and by the colony in manning his 
ships, and against the antagonism of many selfish interests, 
he encountered great difficulties and obstacles with energy, 
courage and wisdom; that amid the greatest discourage- 
ments he displayed fortitude, patience and unfaltering 
faith in the ultimate triumph of the cause for which he 
labored; that his censure by Congress was unjust and 
undeserved; that his dismissal from the navy was upon 
insufficient evidence and upon grounds which were not 
proven; that the real ground of his dismissal was his lack 



i83 

of success which Congress and the colony had rendered 
unattainable by him by neglecting to supply him with 
men and by refusing to enact such measures as would have 
enabled him to secure a sufficient number of men; that 
with the means at his command he rendered efficient 
service in protecting northern Rhode Island and in 
destroying the enemies' commerce by single ships which 
he sent forth for that purpose; that he deserved greater 
success than he attained; that while he was not a great 
naval genius, he was a commander of marked ability who 
with better fortunes and better support would have 
accomplished great things for his country ; that he was an 
incorruptible man, and a good citizen who labored long 
and well for the people of Rhode Island and who well 
deserved the monument which was this day dedicated to 
his memory. 

NATHAN W. LITTLEFIELD. 



LBJe'15 



